1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. The Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Apartment No. 702 is handed over, and

1. Basic facts

A. On May 29, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant issued an order to the Defendant on May 29, 2013.

The lease contract was concluded with the contents of the lease deposit amount of KRW 300 million, the term of lease from July 15, 2013 to July 15, 2014.

B. Under the instant lease agreement, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 29 million on the day of the contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 20 million on the following day, and KRW 49 million on the following day (= KRW 29 million), respectively, as part of the lease deposit.

C. At the time of the instant lease agreement, the right to collateral security (Seoul Central District Court No. 81777, Dec. 31, 2009) in the name of Han Bank Co., Ltd. (Seoul Central District Court No. 8177, Dec. 31, 2009) and the right to lease on a deposit basis (Seoul Central District Court No. 39582, Aug. 2, 201) in the name of 200 million won was respectively set.

Upon entering into the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant set the payment period of KRW 251 million (i.e., KRW 300 million - KRW 49 million) on July 15, 2013, which was the starting date of the lease term, and the Plaintiff received the remainder of the lease deposit from the Defendant.

The right to collateral security and right to lease on a deposit basis was cancelled.

E. However, the Defendant did not pay the remainder of the lease deposit to the Plaintiff KRW 251 million, and occupied the instant apartment on June 3, 2013, without paying the remainder of the lease deposit to the Plaintiff, and is also residing until the date of closing argument in the instant case.

F. On August 30, 2013, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the payment of the remainder of lease deposit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim for delivery of a building among the principal lawsuit

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant failed to perform the obligation to pay the remainder of the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement, and the duplicate of the complaint of this case containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to cancel the said lease agreement on October 11, 2013.