1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

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

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) On September 5, 2015, the Defendant leased the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) on September 5, 2015, from the owner of the Plaintiff’s transfer (hereinafter “instant lease”). The Defendant has operated a restaurant.

(2) The Plaintiff succeeded to the status of the lessor of the instant building by purchasing the instant building and acquiring ownership on May 3, 2018.

B. The Plaintiff’s termination of the lease of this case (1) The Defendant did not pay to the Plaintiff rent up to four months until February 2019.

(2) On February 28, 2019, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a letter verifying the termination of the lease of this case on the ground that the lease of this case is unpaid, and at that time the Plaintiff reached the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination:

(a) The lessor may terminate the contract if the determination on the cause of the claim is made (1) if the overdue charge is equal to three (3) months;

(2) According to the facts recognized above, the lease of this case was terminated.

The Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff.

[Judgment of the court below] The defendant alleged that the defendant paid all of the sealed rent by remitting the monthly amount of March 2, 2019 and the monthly amount of the 19.2 months of the same month, but it does not affect the effect arising from the delivery of the plaintiff's intent to terminate the contract before the transfer.]

B. (1) The Defendant asserted to the effect that there is a justifiable reason not paying rent, since the Plaintiff failed to perform its duty as a lessor, such as not repairing water even if water was leaked from the ceiling of the instant building.

(2) It is insufficient to recognize that only the descriptions and images of Nos. 1 and 4 with respect to the leased object of this case have been generated to the extent that it is difficult to use and benefit from the leased object

In addition, even if the evidence submitted was considered as a whole, the plaintiff did not perform his/her duty as a lessor in relation to the payment of rent and performance.