1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is written from KRW 4,540,140 to KRW 4,540,140 from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) on the attached list from February 29, 2016.

1. - Judgment on both claims in total

A. The Defendant leased the instant building from the Plaintiff on May 2003 to the end of November 30, 2000, with the lease deposit of KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 800,000,000 from the 30th of the same month to the end of November 30, 2004. Accordingly, the Defendant has been continuously occupying and using the instant building from the Plaintiff on May 2003. The fact that the said lease was renewed under the same condition, except that the monthly rent of KRW 700,000 is reduced to the middle of the month, is not disputed between the parties. If the Defendant delayed all or part of the above rent of KRW 5,459,860 on several occasions during the period, and the purport of the entire pleading in each of the items of Articles A-4 to 6-3 is added, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant has delayed the payment of KRW 5,459,860 on several occasions.

B. Since Article 640 of the Civil Act applies to the lease of a commercial building subject to the provisions of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the lease contract may be terminated even to the lessor of the commercial building when the overdue rent of the lessee reaches the two-term rent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da28486, Jul. 24, 2014). According to the facts established above, it is sufficient to view that the lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with respect to the building of this case is lawfully terminated on or around November 3, 2015, when the duplicate of the complaint of this case was delivered to the Defendant due to the repeated default of rent by the Defendant, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obliged to deliver the remainder of the lease deposit of this case (i.e., lease deposit of KRW 10 million - KRW 5,459,860, Feb. 28, 2016) to the Plaintiff at the same time deducting the remainder of the building of this case from the payment of the building of this case from 2.

C. As to this, the Defendant, first of all, is a policeman in the middle of October 2015.