A. On May 14, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement in the form of obligatory lease (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant and the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”), setting the deposit amount of KRW 50,00,000, and the period from July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016, with respect to the building in the form of obligatory lease (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and thereafter, the Plaintiff paid the said deposit to the Defendant.

B. On April 10, 2016 and May 3, 2016, the Plaintiff sent each mobile phone text message to the Defendant that the Plaintiff refused to renew the instant lease agreement and returned the deposit by June 30, 2016 or July 1, 2016.

C. On July 13, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of housing lease on August 25, 2016 upon receipt of the decision on the order of lease registration of housing as Suwon District Court 2016Kao134.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3, 6, 7, 16, Eul's 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. On December 17, 2015, Plaintiff 1) moved in the instant building on and around December 17, 2015, and the term of the instant lease agreement expires, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff deposit amounting to KRW 50,000,000 and delay damages therefor. 2) The Defendant did not deliver the instant building to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff was residing in the instant building on and around April 2016, and thus, the Defendant did not have any obligation to return the deposit to the Plaintiff.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, a lessee, notified the Defendant, who was the lessor, of the refusal of renewal on April 10, 2016 and May 3, 2016, more than one month prior to the expiration of the instant lease term, and thus, the instant lease contract was terminated on June 30, 2016.

In addition, the following circumstances acknowledged by adding up the respective statements and the entire purport of evidence Nos. 4, 9, 11, 14 to the evidence examined earlier, namely, the Plaintiff’s director in the instant building around December 17, 2015.