1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall provide the plaintiff with the real estate listed in the attached list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 14, 2014, the Plaintiff leased (hereinafter “instant lease”) real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant housing”) to the Defendant by setting the deposit amount of KRW 5,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,000, and the lease period of KRW 500,000 from May 30, 2014 (which appears not to be specified at the time of termination), and monthly rent to be paid at the later payment on the 30th day of each month (hereinafter “instant lease”).

B. The Defendant did not pay the rent while occupying the instant house by acquiring it from the Plaintiff.

(In fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 3, partial entry of Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Comprehensively taking account of the fact that the instant lease contract was terminated on April 14, 2015 and the record clearly revealed prior to the termination of the lease contract and the duty to deliver it, the instant lease contract was terminated on April 14, 2015, and the fact that the duplicate of the complaint was served on the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver the subject matter of the lease to the plaintiff.

B. As to the deduction from the defendant's simultaneous performance resistance and the lease deposit for overdue rent from the plaintiff, the defendant raised a defense of simultaneous performance that the plaintiff could not respond to the plaintiff's request for extradition until the lease deposit is returned, so the defendant paid 5 million won to the plaintiff with the lease deposit without dispute between the parties, and as seen earlier, the defendant's duty to deliver the house of this case and the plaintiff's duty to return the lease deposit for the same simultaneous performance, barring special circumstances.

However, the Defendant, from June 30, 2014 to the completion date of delivery of the instant house, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff money at the rate of KRW 500,000 per month as unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent or the rent from June 30, 2014, and the said overdue rent from the deposit that the Plaintiff received.