1. The defendant shall give order to the plaintiff each point of 7, 8, 9, 10, 7 of the attached drawings among the first floor of the building listed in the attached list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 3, 2019, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant by setting the deposit amount of KRW 5,00,00,00 per month for the part (Ga) (hereinafter “instant store”) (hereinafter “instant store”) connected with each point of the attached drawings indicated in 7,8,9,10,10, among the first floor of the building listed in the attached list with the Defendant, from January 10, 2019 to January 9, 2021.

B. On January 10, 2019, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the down payment of KRW 2,000,000,000, and the remainder deposit of KRW 3,000,000 and the rent accrued from January 10, 2019 to the present day is not paid.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the defendant did not pay more than three vehicles, and as long as the plaintiff notified the termination of the lease contract of this case by serving the written complaint of this case, it is reasonable to view that the lease contract of this case was terminated.

Unless special circumstances exist, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff, and the amount calculated by deducting the down payment of KRW 2,00,000,000, which was paid at KRW 2,800,000 for seven months from January 10, 2019 to August 9, 2019.

In addition, the instant complaint is obligated to pay 12% interest per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from September 28, 2019 to the date of full payment after the date of delivery of the complaint to the Defendant. The Defendant is obligated to pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated at the rate of 400,000 won per month from August 10, 2019 to the date of delivery of the instant store.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The gist of the assertion was that the Plaintiff, a lessor of the instant lease agreement, did not perform his/her duty to bear the costs of repairing the boiler of the instant store, and the Defendant may refuse to pay the rent on the ground that he/she did not repair the boiler of the instant store.