1. The defendant shall deliver to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 28, 201, the Defendant leased the building specified in Paragraph (1) of this Article (hereinafter “instant building”) from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation at KRW 76,00,000, and KRW 390,000,00 per month, and paid all the deposit money to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, and had resided in the instant building.

B. On August 30, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) set the due date of repayment of KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant on December 31, 2013; and (b) set KRW 6.5% per annum; and (c) set the due date of repayment of KRW 13,70,000 on December 27, 2013 to the Defendant as KRW 4.5% per annum for changes in December 27, 2015.

C. On the other hand, on August 28, 2012, the Defendant transferred KRW 76,00,000 to the Plaintiff as to the building stated in paragraph (1) of this Article, which the Defendant had against the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, and notified the purport of the transfer to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation around that time.

On December 30, 2013, the Defendant paid the amount of KRW 3,648,00 of the lease deposit to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation after renewal of the lease agreement with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, extended the expiration date of the lease term on December 31, 2015, and the transfer procedure as above was completed for the increased portion of the lease deposit to the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry in Gap's evidence 1, 3, 5, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. In the instant case where the Plaintiff seeks delivery of a building on the ground of the termination of a lease agreement on behalf of the Korea Land and Housing Corporation for securing the principal and interest of the loan, the Defendant extended the loan agreement with the Plaintiff and repaid all unpaid interest, etc., so the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful as there is no need to preserve the lawsuit, but there is no evidence to prove that the loan contract was extended, and the Defendant’s objection prior to the merits is rejected

3. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant's judgment against the plaintiff.