1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Of the buildings indicated in the attached list, one floor is removed from 62.30 square meters, and the above 62.30 square meters are located.

1. The facts below the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries in Gap evidence 1 and 2.

On January 24, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a lease contract with a lease deposit of 3 million won, monthly rent of 200,000 won (payment on January 25), and a lease contract with a lease term of 2 years (hereinafter “the lease contract in this case”) with respect to 62.30 square meters on the first floor among the buildings listed in the attached Table, which were owned by the Plaintiff, from among the buildings owned by the Plaintiff. At that time, the Defendant began to reside after receiving delivery of the leased object from the Plaintiff

B. The Defendant does not pay more than once the monthly rent stipulated in the instant lease agreement, in addition to the payment made once.

C. On September 19, 2017, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s monthly unpaid rent, and filed the instant lawsuit.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the instant lease contract was terminated due to the Plaintiff’s lawful termination, and the Defendant shall withdraw the Plaintiff from the area 62.30 square meters of the said 1st floor which is the object of the instant lease contract, deliver it, and, upon the Plaintiff’s request, pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the amount of 200,000 won per month from March 25, 2017 to the date of the completion of the delivery of the contract.

B. The Defendant’s assertion and determination (1) The Defendant, as the object of the instant lease agreement, did not accept the instant lease agreement, even though the Plaintiff requested repair due to water leakage on the wall and floor from the early stage of lease to the date of lease. As such, the Plaintiff did not properly perform its duty to allow the Defendant to use and benefit from the leased object as a lessor under the instant lease agreement, there is no reason to pay monthly rent to the Defendant.

(2) The Defendant, as a lessee, did not properly use and benefit from the leased object of this case.