2. Defendant.

A. On December 23, 2011, Defendant A leased the instant real estate from the Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation (hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”); from January 1, 201, to December 31, 2013, from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2013; (i) monthly rent of KRW 170,820; and (ii) deposit of KRW 20,540,00 (hereinafter “instant lease”); and (iii) around that time, Defendant A paid the said deposit to the Defendant Corporation.

After December 23, 2013, from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015, the lease deposit is increased to KRW 21,525,00, and the lease deposit is increased to KRW 21,525,00, December 31, 2015, the lease deposit is increased to KRW 22,579,00.

B. On April 9, 2012, the Plaintiff granted a loan of KRW 17,400,00 to Defendant A, and acquired KRW 20,540,000, the lease deposit that Defendant A owns to Defendant Corporation in order to secure the repayment of the loan. The Defendant A notified the Defendant Corporation of the above transfer on the same day, and the notification reached Defendant Corporation around that time.

C. Around May 12, 2017, Defendant A lost the benefit of the term of the above loan.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including the number of each branch), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. After a lessor received the notification of the transfer of the claim for the return of the lease deposit against Defendant A, even if there exists an explicit or implied agreement between the lessor and the lessee regarding the renewal of the lease contract or extension of the contract term, the effect of the agreement cannot be affected by the transferee of the claim for the return of the deposit (see Supreme Court Decision 88Meu4253, Apr. 25, 1989). According to the above recognition, the instant lease contract was terminated at the latest on December 31, 2017.

As such, the defendant A shall deliver the real estate of this case to the defendant Corporation as the plaintiff seeks on behalf of the defendant.