1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) with KRW 2,807,950.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 14, 2018, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 700,000 (prepaid on August 23, 2018), from August 23, 2018 to August 23, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease”).

B. However, the Defendant paid the monthly rent by December 23, 2018, but did not pay the rent from January 23, 2019.

C. On February 25, 2019, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail to the effect that “If the Defendant did not pay all the overdue rent by February 28, 2019, as the Defendant did not pay the rent for the second period, the instant lease shall be terminated immediately.”

On the other hand, the Defendant was a director of the instant real estate on April 26, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Items A 1, 2, 4, B 7 through 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On February 23, 2019, the Plaintiff sought to deliver the instant real estate at the same time, at the same time, from February 23, 2019 to the date of delivery of the instant real estate, the Plaintiff received money calculated by deducting the money equivalent to KRW 700,000 per month from the deposit for lease deposit remaining as of February 23, 2019 (i.e., deposit KRW 5 million - overdue loan KRW 1.4 million) to the Defendant, and at the same time, from February 23, 2019 to the date the delivery of the instant real estate is completed. According to the facts and the purport of the entire arguments as seen earlier, it is recognized that the Defendant had already delivered the instant real estate by giving the said real estate’s face number after being moved from the instant real estate

3. Judgment on a counterclaim

A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion (1) was to the extent that it was impossible for the Plaintiff to use the instant real estate as a residence due to the apparent wind. The Plaintiff failed to take proper measures to block outdoor wind at the Defendant’s request, and the Defendant failed to use the said real estate from October 2018 to March 2019. Ultimately, the Plaintiff’s monthly rent paid by the Defendant.