A. On April 15, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from the Defendant with the term of KRW 130,00,000, and the term of lease from May 30, 2013 to May 29, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B) The Plaintiff paid KRW 130,00,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant received the instant apartment from the Defendant (C) and the Defendant agreed on February 16, 2015 to increase the lease deposit amount of the instant lease to KRW 145,00,000 and to extend the lease term to May 24, 2018.

Around February 24, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 15,000,00 to the Defendant a deposit increased pursuant to the above agreement. (d) The Plaintiff notified the Defendant that he/she had no intention to renew the instant lease agreement no longer than one month before May 24, 2018, which is the expiration date of the instant lease agreement. According to the above findings, according to the following findings, the instant lease agreement was terminated on May 24, 2018, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 145,00,000 to the Plaintiff, as the lease agreement was terminated on May 24, 2018.

B. (1) The Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay against deposit is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of full payment. (2) Since the lessee’s obligation to specify the leased object and the duty to return the deposit to the lessor is in a simultaneous performance relationship, in order to extinguish the lessor’s defense of simultaneous performance and to recognize the lessor’s obligation to pay for delay of the deposit, the lessee must provide the lessor with an explanation of the leased object.

Supreme Court Decision 200 delivered on February 26, 2002