1. The defendant shall receive KRW 106,840 from the plaintiff and at the same time real estate stated in the attached Table to the plaintiff.

1. On October 16, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a lease on a deposit basis (hereinafter “instant lease on a deposit basis”) with the Defendant as well as the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) with the Plaintiff as “the lease on a deposit basis”) from October 16, 2006 to October 15, 201, and the lease on a deposit basis with the person having chonsegwon as “the Defendant” (hereinafter “the lease on a deposit basis”). As to this, the Plaintiff entered into a lease on a deposit basis (hereinafter “the lease on a deposit basis”) with the Daegu District Court’s registry No. 41784, Oct. 16, 2006.

On October 22, 2011, the Plaintiff and the Defendant terminated the instant contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis. On the same day, the Plaintiff paid KRW 14,850,000 to the Defendant out of KRW 15,000,000, and the Defendant delivered the instant real estate to the Plaintiff around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, as the contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis was terminated on October 22, 2011, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of the right to lease on a deposit basis to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances. 2) As to this, the Defendant asserted that the registration procedure for cancellation of the right to lease on a deposit basis cannot be implemented until the Plaintiff is paid KRW 150,000, which was unpaid by the Plaintiff out of the deposit money.

The obligation of the person having chonsegwon to implement procedures for cancellation of the registration of chonsegwon at the time of termination of chonsegwon and the obligation of the person having chonsegwon to return the deposit money simultaneously is in the relation of simultaneous performance, and the plaintiff has not paid KRW 150,000 out of the deposit money to the defendant.

However, according to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 3-1 through 4, and Gap evidence Nos. 5, the plaintiff paid the defendant's unpaid electricity charges of 43,160 won (i.e., 14,590 won on January 1, 2011) on behalf of the defendant (i.e., 15,630 won on February 15, 201, 201, 3,050 won on March 3, 2011, 8,720 won on October 1, 201, and 1,170 won on a deposit basis).