1. The defendant shall receive KRW 300 million from the plaintiffs, and at the same time deliver the buildings listed in the attached Form to the plaintiffs.

1. The fact that, on September 17, 2014, the Plaintiffs, as the owners of the buildings listed in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant apartment”), leased the instant apartment to the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 300 million and the lease term from September 17, 2014 to September 19, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) as the leased owner of the building (hereinafter “instant apartment”) does not conflict between the parties.

According to the above facts, since the lease contract of this case was terminated as the expiration date, the defendant is obligated to deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiffs unless there are special circumstances.

2. The defendant's defense is a simultaneous performance defense that the defendant cannot deliver the apartment of this case until he is paid KRW 300 million from the plaintiffs. Thus, the defendant paid KRW 300 million to the plaintiffs as the lease deposit for the apartment of this case. Thus, the plaintiffs are obligated to return the above lease deposit to the defendant, and this is a simultaneous performance relation with the defendant's duty to deliver the apartment of this case.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is justified.

3. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to receive KRW 300 million from the plaintiffs to deliver the apartment of this case at the same time. Thus, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit.