A. On December 1, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis with the term of 180,000,000 won for lease on a deposit basis, and the term of 1 December 1, 2016 for lease on a deposit basis with respect to 401 units of detached houses on the ground (hereinafter “the subject matter of lease on a deposit basis”) of 449, 449-1, Ypo-si, Gwangju Metropolitan City.

B. On December 1, 2015, the Plaintiff paid the above deposit money to the Defendant, and completed the registration of the establishment of chonsegwon (hereinafter “registration of the establishment of chonsegwon”) based on the contract to establish the right to lease on a deposit basis on the subject matter of the lease on a deposit basis.

C. From October 2016 to November 201, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to refund the deposit money on December 1, 2016, which is the expiration date of the contract. On December 1, 2016, the expiration date of the term of the lease on a deposit basis, the Plaintiff handed over the subject matter of the lease on a deposit basis to the Defendant on December 1, 2016.

On June 30, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to a certified judicial scrivener A documents necessary for the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant chonsegwon, and around July 4, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that “A keeps documents necessary for the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the instant chonsegwon. If the Defendant immediately returned the deposit money, the right to lease on a deposit basis shall be cancelled with the documents kept as above.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap 1 through 8 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition, since the contract on the subject matter of the prior lease of this case ends on December 1, 2016, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 180,000,000 to the Plaintiff, as such contract is terminated on December 1, 2016.

The defendant asserts that the contract termination date was December 1, 2017 due to the lack of a separate declaration of intention by B, who is a party to the contract.

However, the parties to the instant contract are the Plaintiff.

Since the Plaintiff did not continue to use the subject matter of the prior lease even after the expiration of the contract period, there is no room for application of the implied renewal provision of Article 639 of the Civil Code.