1. The defendant shall receive KRW 50 million from the plaintiff, and at the same time, shall be attached to the real estate stated in the attached Form among the plaintiff.

1. Where the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the evidence evidence No. 1 through 5 as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff leased on September 5, 2013 to the Defendant and his/her spouse C (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”) a lease deposit of KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 3 million (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the lease period of KRW 3 million from October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2015, and the Plaintiff, et al. thereafter, extended the lease period of KRW 1,2,3,4, and 177 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) among the real estate stated in the attached Form, and notified Defendant et al. of his/her intention to extend the lease period of KRW 30,000 for up to September 30, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant et al. again agreed on the extension of the lease period of KRW 30,000 for up to September 30, 20197.

Therefore, since the lease contract on the instant real estate is terminated due to the expiration of the term, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

2. The defendant's defense is proved to have a duty to return the lease deposit and at the same time to deliver the real estate of this case. Since the duty to return the lease deposit in the lease contract has a relationship of simultaneous performance with the lessee's duty to return the lease deposit, the defendant's defense is with merit.

Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff at the same time with the payment of KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the above scope of recognition. Since the remaining claims are without merit, they are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.