1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant, from the plaintiff, heading 109, 402, Busan Young-gu C building 109.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On November 5, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant with the content that the Plaintiff leases the lease deposit of KRW 180,00,00,00 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of 109,000,000,000 among the remainder of the lease deposit of KRW 142,820,00 among the remainder of the lease deposit of KRW 143,00,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,0000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00,00.

Therefore, the instant lease contract is a contract with no fixed period of time, which is implicitly renewed, and is terminated on October 26, 2016 after three months from the date of notifying the lessee of the termination of the lease (see Article 6-2(1) and (2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act). Thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 180,000,000, barring any special circumstance.

B. On the other hand, the lessee’s obligation to specify the leased object and the lessor’s obligation to return the deposit are concurrently performed. Thus, in order to extinguish the lessor’s right of defense of simultaneous performance and to recognize the lessor’s obligation to delay the repayment of the deposit, the lessee must provide the lessor with the indication of the leased object (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da77697, Feb. 26, 2002). In addition, it is recognized that the Plaintiff, without having access to the instant real estate, was performing the obligation to deliver the instant real estate solely on the basis that the Plaintiff resided in other places without having access to the instant