1. The defendant shall order each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, and 1 among the buildings listed in the attached Table list to the plaintiff.

1. 청구원인에 관한 판단 원고는 2015. 6. 9. 피고에게 별지 목록 기재 건물 중 주문 제1항 기재 ㈎부분 및 ㈏부분을 임대차기간 2015. 6. 25.부터 2017. 6. 24.까지, 월 차임 각 175만 원(2016. 6. 24.까지는 각 150만 원, 부가가치세 별도)에 임대하였다

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement.” The Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement by serving the instant complaint on the ground that the Defendant was in arrears for at least six months from June 2016.

【인정 근거】다툼 없는 사실, 갑 2, 3호증(가지번호 포함)의 각 기재 특별한 사정이 없는 한, 이 사건 임대차계약은 원고의 해지의 의사표시에 의하여 해지되었다고 할 것이므로, 피고는 원고에게 별지 목록 기재 건물 중 주문 제1항 기재 ㈎부분 및 ㈏부분을 인도하여야 한다.

2. First of all, the defendant's defense is asserted that the defendant did not pay the rent under the plaintiff's understanding, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

Next, the Defendant asserts that, on November 9, 2016, deposited KRW 4,876,480 to the Plaintiff and appropriated for part of the rent for June 2016 and the rent for July 2016, the Plaintiff did not reach the rent for three months at the time of termination of the instant lease agreement.

On November 9, 2016, the fact that the Defendant paid KRW 4,876,480 to the Plaintiff on November 9, 2016 is not disputed between the parties, but the repayment amount is determined by the Plaintiff, as designated by the Plaintiff, that KRW 3,510,874, out of property tax, KRW 3,510,874, the remainder of KRW 1,365,60, and KRW 606, among property tax to be borne by the Defendant, are appropriated for the repayment of part of the management expenses for the portion of June 2016 (the purport of evidence 2-1, 2-2 and each of the arguments and the whole purport of arguments). In addition, even if it was appropriated for the repayment of the overdue rent as alleged by the Defendant, even if it was appropriated for the repayment of the overdue rent, around December 2016, the Plaintiff’s delayed rent of the Defendant around 3th July 2016.