1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall receive 14,98,00 won from the plaintiff at the same time.

On January 27, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant on the condition that “the map” is indicated as “the second floor (three households), 149.77 square meters of the building indicated in the “mark of real estate” (hereinafter “the instant building”) and the lease agreement with the Defendant to lease KRW 16 million of the lease deposit and the term of February 25, 2012 from February 25, 2012 to February 24, 2014 with respect to the part on board (hereinafter “instant building”).

The Defendant paid KRW 16 million to the Plaintiff according to the above lease agreement, and occupied and used the instant building by being handed over from the Plaintiff.

On January 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the refusal to renew the instant lease agreement.

【In light of the above-mentioned facts in light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the cause of claim for judgment, the lease contract of this case was terminated on February 24, 2014. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, except in special circumstances.

The defendant's simultaneous performance defense as to the defendant's defenses, etc., defenses to the effect that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until the return of 15.66 million won (1.6 million won - 3.4 million won) which deducts the unpaid water rate of 3.4 million won from February 2, 2012 to November 2014 from the lease deposit. Thus, since the defendant's simultaneous performance defenses to the effect that when the lease contract is terminated, the delivery obligation of the lease object and the obligation to return the lease deposit are in the simultaneous performance relationship, the above simultaneous performance defenses by the defendant are reasonable.

The Plaintiff’s re-appeal Plaintiff’s remainder of the lease deposit, ① additional unpaid water rates from December 2014 to now, and unpaid joint electricity and management fees, septic tank cleaning fees, and ② Defendant failed to properly operate the boiler of the instant building from the beginning date of the lease term to the present date.