1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. From September 2, 2020 to 11,250,000 won from the Plaintiff, the instant real estate.

Comprehensively taking account of the facts that there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the cause of the claim and the overall purport of the statements and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 2 and Eul evidence No. 7, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on June 14, 2019 with regard to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "the real estate in this case") with a deposit of KRW 20 million, monthly taxing KRW 1250,000,000, and the lease period from July 2, 2019 to July 1, 2021 (hereinafter "the lease agreement in this case"). The plaintiff delivered the above real estate to the defendant around July 2019, the defendant paid the above deposit of KRW 20,000,000 to the plaintiff, and the defendant paid the real estate by December 5, 2019 to the defendant's notice that the lease agreement in this case was terminated by the last day of May 20, 2019.

According to the above facts, since the defendant was unpaid for more than two months, the above lease contract was terminated around July 13, 2020 after the plaintiff notified the plaintiff of his intention to terminate the lease contract of this case. The defendant has the duty to deliver the real estate of this case and the duty to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the unpaid monthly rent and the unpaid monthly rent to the plaintiff.

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that malodor in the sewage outlet of the real estate of this case showed that the plaintiff did not pay monthly rent because of the plaintiff's non-performance of the demand, although malodor was emitted in the sewage outlet of this case and many defects were required

In accordance with a lease agreement, a lessor is obligated to repair an object so that the lessee can use it in line with the purpose of the lease, but if the Plaintiff is obligated to repair the object of this case.