The defendant shall receive KRW 3,00,000 from the plaintiff, and at the same time, shall be attached to the first floor of the real estate stated in the attached Table among the plaintiff.

On November 1, 2018, the Plaintiff leased the attached Form No. 3,000,000 deposit and the period from November 1, 2018 to March 31, 2019 with respect to the part indicated in the attached Form No. 3,00,000 among the first floor of the building indicated in the attached Form No. 1 to the Defendant.

(A) No. 1, 200,000 won is paid by the Plaintiff and the Defendant is obliged to deliver the said leased object to the Plaintiff at the same time, as the said lease contract has expired upon expiration of the period of termination.

As to this, the defendant argued that the term of lease under the original lease was January 2, 2020, which was later reduced to March 31, 2019, and that the agreement was made by the plaintiff's coercion, and thus, it is invalid.

However, the evidence alone presented by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the above agreement was reached by the plaintiff's coercion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The Defendant asserts that the deposit should be returned KRW 4,00,000. The deposit amount of KRW 1,000,000 exceeding the above-mentioned KRW 3,00,000 is a deposit under a lease agreement on other place than the leased object of this case (this evidence No. 1-1), and the payment of the deposit cannot be deemed to be in the simultaneous performance relationship with the return of the leased object of this case.