1. The Defendants simultaneously with the delivery of the buildings listed in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff, and jointly with the Plaintiff 5,00.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 15, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to lease a building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) with respect to each of the buildings jointly owned by the Defendants as one-half shares, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 55 million and the lease term from September 25, 2015 to September 25, 2017.

(hereinafter “Lease of this case”). (b)

The Plaintiff received delivery from the Defendants of the instant building and has resided in the said building until now, and requested the Defendants to return the lease deposit from September 25, 2019, the maturity date of the instant lease which was implicitly renewed, and expressed their intent to refuse the renewal of the instant lease contract.

[Evidence Evidence: Records or recordings of Evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. According to the above facts as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on September 25, 2019 due to the Plaintiff’s declaration of refusal to renew the lease agreement, and the obligation to return the lease deposit by a joint lessor is indivisible in its nature. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly obligated to jointly return the lease deposit amount to the Plaintiff in the amount of KRW 55 million.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s duty to deliver the instant building and the Defendants’ duty to return the lease deposit of this case are in simultaneous performance relationship, and that the Plaintiff may refuse to return the lease deposit of this case until the Plaintiff delivers the instant building. 2) Since the Plaintiff’s duty to deliver the object and the duty to return the lease deposit of this case upon the termination of the lease is in simultaneous performance relationship, the Defendants are obliged to return the lease deposit of this case to the Plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the instant building from the Plaintiff.

However, according to such concurrent performance defense right, the defendants delivered the building of this case.