손해배상등
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. As to the claim for refund of the lease deposit
A. The assertion that the lessor is obligated to return 5 million won of the deposit for the lease of the house to the lessee. Since it is reasonable that the Defendant did not perform the duty to repair the house as the lessor and thus, the Plaintiff did not pay the rent equivalent to the consideration, it shall not be deducted from the deposit for lease.
B. The Plaintiff, on February 10, 2003, leased the housing of Gyeyang-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant housing”) from C with a deposit of five million won, KRW 300,000 per month, the lease period from February 27, 2003 to December 12, 2003 (hereinafter “the lease of this case”), and the above deposit was paid on February 27, 2003. The Defendant acquired the instant housing from C on April 6, 2004. 2) The Plaintiff was in arrears, and the Defendant exempted the Plaintiff from the rent of KRW 3 million until April 26, 2014, deducting the lease deposit from KRW 9,858,000, KRW 508,000, KRW 508,000, KRW 508508,000,000, KRW 5085,5085,000,000.
3) The Plaintiff did not pay the rent even after the exemption from the rent. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking unjust enrichment equivalent to the transfer and rent of the instant house by this court 2014Kadan60506. In the said lawsuit, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease contract on the ground of the Plaintiff’s delinquency in payment of rent for at least two different periods of rent. [The written evidence Nos. 1, 2, 1, 2, and 5 of the grounds for recognition, as well as the purport of the entire pleadings.]
C. The claim for the refund of the lease deposit is entirely deducted from the overdue rent and terminated, and it is difficult to view that the Defendant failed to perform the repair obligation of the instant house as seen in the following Paragraph 2, and the above argument is without merit.
2. As to the claim for damages
A. The alleged defendant rejected the repair of the water leakage of the instant house, and thereby, electronic equipment, furniture, clothes, and books owned by the plaintiff.