1. The defendant shall deliver real estate stated in the separate sheet from the plaintiff to the plaintiff at the same time. 150,000,000 won shall be applied to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 25, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the following terms: (a) paid the lease deposit to the Defendant on August 14, 2012; and (b) occupied and used the instant real estate on August 16, 2012.

From August 16, 2012, the lease deposit amount of KRW 150,000,000 is the lease of the current state of the facility from August 16, 2012, and shall be restored to its original state in the event of

B. On August 16, 2014, the Plaintiff decided to extend the term of lease under the said lease agreement with the Defendant from August 15, 2014 to August 15, 2016.

C. On June 10, 2016, one month prior to the expiration of the lease term under the above lease agreement, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail with no intent to renew the above lease, and the above content-certified mail reached the Defendant on June 16, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including household numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 150,000,000 to the plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the instant real estate from the plaintiff, barring any special circumstance, since the above lease contract was terminated upon the expiration of the term.

B. The defendant's assertion and judgment that the plaintiff damaged the real estate of this case during the term of the above lease agreement and caused repair costs equivalent to KRW 35 million. This is the plaintiff's obligation under the above lease agreement, and thus, the defendant should be deducted from the lease deposit to be returned to the plaintiff.

In light of the records or images, etc. of evidence Nos. 5 and 6, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff damaged the instant real estate by only the descriptions or images of evidence No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

3. Conclusion.