2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

A. The Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement and the Defendant’s occupancy 1) on May 23, 2006, with the Defendant, set the first rental deposit as KRW 246,940,00, and the first rental fee as to D apartment units No. 102, 503, 198.9m2 (supply Area 198.9m2) newly constructed on the block block in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, with the approval of the project plan for the construction of publicly constructed rental housing (hereinafter the instant lease agreement) as KRW 593,00 per month (hereinafter the instant lease agreement).

A) At that time, Article 9(1)5 of the instant lease agreement, which was concluded by the Plaintiff, stipulates that the Plaintiff may terminate the contract in cases where the lessee has been in arrears for more than three months. (2) The first lease deposit and the standard rent under the instant lease agreement were based on the relevant laws and regulations, such as the former Rental Housing Act, based on the rate of 3.45% per annum, which is the interest rate of a term deposit with a maturity of one year (the rental deposit is higher than the standard rental deposit, and then the relevant amount is reduced from the standard rent by applying the interest rate of 3.45%).

3) On January 9, 2009, the Defendant paid 246,940,000 won for the first time deposit to the Plaintiff on January 9, 2009, and is an apartment as indicated in the attached Table (hereinafter “the apartment”).

(B) The Plaintiff and the Defendant, etc. paid the rent of KRW 593,00 each month after moving into the 593,00. (B) The Defendant’s lawsuit 1) is null and void since converting the standard rental deposit to the Plaintiff (the Defendant in the instant case; hereinafter the same shall apply) without the consent of the lessee, including the Defendant (the Plaintiff in the instant case; hereinafter the same shall apply), along with other lessees of the D apartment around May 2009, the Defendant asserted that the difference exceeding the standard rental deposit out of the initial rental deposit paid by the Defendant is unjust enrichment, and