The successor number shall be KRW 98 million to the plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of apartment units listed in the attached list from the plaintiff.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendants around January 30, 2018 on the lease deposit amounting to KRW 99.8 million and the period from March 14, 2018 to March 13, 2020. ② The plaintiff clearly declared that the contract was terminated by the delivery of the copy of the complaint to the defendants on July 27, 2020, and the above lease was terminated around the time when the copy of the complaint was delivered to the defendants around July 27, 2020. ③ As such, on August 28, 2020, when the lease agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants was terminated and the lawsuit was pending, each of the facts that the successor to the apartment of this case completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 30, 202.

According to the above facts of recognition, the successor transferee acquired ownership of the apartment of this case and succeeded to the status of the defendants as lessor under a lease agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants.

Therefore, the successor is obliged to deliver the apartment of this case from the plaintiff to the plaintiff as a result of the termination of the above lease contract, at the same time, to pay the lease deposit of 9.8 million won to the plaintiff, and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from the day after the day when the apartment of this case is delivered by the plaintiff to the day when the above 9.8 million won is fully repaid.

Meanwhile, according to the acquisition by transfer of the apartment of this case by the successor, the status of the lessor under the existing lease agreement with the ownership of the apartment of this case for which the plaintiff has an opposing power is exempted, and the obligation to return the existing lease deposit to the plaintiff of the defendants was extinguished.