1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. From November 5, 2014, 5,300 won and above.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 5, 2012, the Plaintiff and Nonparty C (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, and with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,100,000, and the lease period of KRW 2 years. Around that time, the Plaintiff and Nonparty C (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) transferred the instant real estate to the Defendant for use.

B. However, after that, the Defendant paid 70,000 monthly rent to the Plaintiff, etc. (only the monthly rent up to December 4, 2012), and did not pay any more. On April 18, 2014, the Plaintiff, etc. sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail to the effect that the lease contract is terminated on the grounds of the rent delay, and around that time, the content-certified mail sent to the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the above lease contract was lawfully terminated by the plaintiff et al. due to the delay of rent of the defendant.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff as restitution, and as requested by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 5,30,000 won (23 months from December 5, 2012 to November 4, 2014 x 1,00,000 won - lease deposit 20,000 won) and 1,100,000 won per month from November 5, 2014 to the completion of delivery of the instant real estate.

I would like to say.

In regard to this, the defendant requires KRW 100,005,00 for the test of the real estate in this case. Thus, the defendant does not have a duty to deliver the real estate in this case to the plaintiff before receiving the above money from the plaintiff, and the defendant does not have a duty to return the beneficial cost or pay the premium.