1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall receive KRW 3,591,667 from the plaintiff at the same time.

1. As to the judgment of the first instance that was rendered on February 8, 2018 by the Defendant, the Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion on May 14, 2018. In full view of the records and the purport of the entire pleadings in the instant case, the first instance court proceeded with the litigation by means of service by public notice from the delivery of a copy of the complaint against the Defendant, and the Defendant appears to have become aware of the fact that the original judgment was issued on May 3, 2018 and the said judgment was served by public notice. Thus, the instant appeal for subsequent completion filed within two weeks thereafter is lawful.

2. Basic facts

A. On April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant building, entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the second floor of the instant building by setting the deposit amount of KRW 20 million, KRW 2750,000 per month, KRW 2750,000 per month (including value-added tax, and KRW 18,000 per month), and April 17, 2018, (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). In the instant lease agreement, the lessor stated that the lessor may terminate the lease agreement if the lessee is in arrears of the second floor.

B. From November 19, 2016, the Defendant, who operated a real estate brokerage office on the second floor of the instant building, did not pay the Plaintiff rent. Accordingly, on April 24, 2017, and April 26, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail stating that “if the instant vehicle is unpaid, it shall be paid a five-month difference.” The Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a content-certified mail stating that “if it is unpaid, it shall restore the leased object to its original state until May 17, 2017, and deliver it to the Plaintiff,” and around that time, the Defendant received each content-certified mail.

C. On June 7, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a content-certified mail to the Defendant, stating that “The payment of overdue rent and restoration to the original state previously requested at a time has not been completed, so that the leased object may be restored to its original state and delivered to the original state.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Determination.