1. The defendant shall deliver real estate stated in the attached list from the plaintiff to the plaintiff at the same time, and at the same time, KRW 135,00,000 to the plaintiff.

1. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, unless there is a dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings:

On August 22, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit of KRW 135,00,000, and the lease term as of October 7, 2017 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On September 29, 2017, the Plaintiff had to extend the term of the instant lease agreement to October 7, 2018, and resided in the instant apartment. After the said term expires, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking the return of the lease deposit on the ground that the term of the instant lease agreement expires, and the fact that the copy of the complaint was served on the Defendant on January 2, 2019 is apparent.

C. As of the date of closing argument of the instant case, the Plaintiff occupied the instant apartment.

2. According to the above findings of the determination on the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement became implied after the expiration of the period of validity.

The Housing Lease Protection Act (Article 6(1) and Article 6(1) of the Housing Lease Protection Act), and in the case of a lease for which an implied renewal has been made, the lessee may notify the lessor of the termination of the contract at any time and the lessor shall take effect after three months have elapsed from the date of receipt of the notification (Article 6-2 of the Housing Lease Protection Act). As seen above, once the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant to claim the return of the deposit money under the Housing Lease Protection Act and the copy of the complaint has been delivered to the defendant, the lease of this case shall be deemed to have been terminated at around three months from the

Therefore, the defendant has the duty to return KRW 135,00,000 to the plaintiff at the same time as the delivery of the apartment of this case, which is the object of lease, from the plaintiff.