1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff one story of 99.45 square meters among the real estate listed in the attached list.

2. The defendant shall make the plaintiff 5,597.

1. On December 2010, the Plaintiff leased real estate specified in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant at KRW 500,000, monthly rent, and the Defendant occupied and used the instant building from that time. The Defendant’s delay in payment of rent for at least three years is without dispute between the parties, and the fact that the copy of the complaint of this case containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention to terminate the lease contract was delivered to the Defendant on September 1, 2015 is apparent in the record, and thus the lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the building of this case is to be retained until the right to claim reimbursement of useful expenses is repaid, since the defendant paid money necessary for the repair of the building of this case upon the plaintiff's request, but the defendant's claim regarding the above expenses has been extinguished in accordance with the defendant's declaration of offset as shown below. The above argument by

2. As to the rent claim

A. The fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant determined that the rent was KRW 500,000 per month in a lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the cause of the claim is as seen earlier. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the rent of KRW 15,50,000 for the period from January 2, 2013 to July 2015, which the Plaintiff seeks for 31 months (=50,000 x 31 months) and the delay damages.

B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion 1) As the Defendant paid all the rent up to the part of February 2014, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s partial claim for rent, which is premised on the Defendant’s delinquency from January 2013 to the part of February 2014, is unreasonable. The burden of proving that the claim for rent was extinguished on the ground of repayment, etc. is extinguished on the part of the lessee (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da8323, 830, Sept. 28, 2005) and the evidence No. 2 (including the serial number).