1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall receive KRW 15,250,000 from the plaintiff.

1. According to the record as to the legitimacy of the appeal of this case, the court of first instance may recognize the fact that the defendant submitted the written appeal of this case within two weeks after he became aware of the fact that the court served the duplicate of the complaint against the defendant, the date of pleading, the notice of the date of pleading, and the authentic copy of the judgment by public notice against the defendant. Thus, the appeal of this case is lawful.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 15, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the instant real estate by setting the lease deposit of KRW 25 million, monthly rent of KRW 250,000 (payment after the end of each month), the lease term from November 30, 2013 to November 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

B. The Defendant, after paying the lease deposit to the Plaintiff, received the instant real estate from the Plaintiff, and possessed and used it up to August 31, 2015, paid the rent only until August 31, 2015, and did not pay the rent from September 1, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 5 evidence, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. According to the facts seen earlier prior to the determination on the instant claim for delivery of real estate, the instant contract is deemed terminated on November 30, 2015, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

On the other hand, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case at the same time with the amount after deducting the rent in arrears from the lease deposit.

On the other hand, the obligation to return the object of the Defendant and the obligation to return the Plaintiff’s lease deposit are in the simultaneous performance relationship. The fact that the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount of KRW 25 million is as seen earlier. According to the above facts, the sum of the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent in arrears of the Defendant is close to the date of the closing of argument in this case.