A. On November 13, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the terms of KRW 90,00,000,00 for the lease deposit, and the term of the lease from December 20, 2013 to December 19, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Plaintiff, and resided in the instant apartment after paying the deposit for the lease deposit.

B. On December 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to extend the term of the instant lease agreement for one year.

C. On March 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) cancelled the instant lease agreement to the Defendant; (b) requested the Defendant to refund the lease deposit; and (c) delivered the instant apartment on April 1, 2016.

On April 1, 2016, the Defendant returned 50,000,000 won out of the lease deposit to the Plaintiff and paid the remainder to another lessee upon the Plaintiff’s request. The Plaintiff and the Defendant paid the brokerage commission required for seeking a new lessee.

On the other hand, the plaintiff living in the apartment of this case and borne 692,610 won of long-term repair appropriations on behalf of the defendant, and the lease brokerage commission of this case is 30,000 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the instant lease contract was terminated upon the conclusion of agreement on April 1, 2016, and therefore, the Defendant is entitled to special cases concerning the promotion of litigation, etc. as to the Plaintiff from April 23, 2016 to the date of this judgment, deducting 330,00 won from the balance of the lease deposit and the long-term repair appropriations of KRW 692,610, the total of KRW 40,692,610, and the remainder of KRW 40,362,610, which is the result of deducting 330,000 brokerage fees required for the lease of the instant apartment from the total of KRW 40,692,610, and the scope of the Defendant’s performance obligation.