임대차보증금반환 등
1. The Defendant’s KRW 6,016,272 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from October 17, 2017 to July 25, 2018.
1. Basic facts
A. On October 24, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant with respect to the Namyang-si, Namyang-si, C apartment, 3408 Dong 1303 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with respect to KRW 80 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.3 million (payment on December 23, 2015), and the lease agreement between December 23, 2015 and December 23, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and the Defendant resided in the Defendant’s remainder of KRW 10 million on the date of the contract, KRW 70 million on December 23, 2015, respectively.
B. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant and the Defendant’s spouse D on April 17, 2016, upon the occurrence of the phenomenon that water drained in the apartment inside the instant apartment zone, and the Defendant carried out the repair work on the said defect two occasions from June 2016 to August 2016.
C. On May 20, 2017, the Plaintiff agreed to the Defendant by telephone to offer a director at the end of June 2017. On May 30, 2017, the Plaintiff obtained D’s consent by deeming D to be a director at around October 2017 due to the interior work of a house where D will meet or move.
Around September 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant and D that he will be a director on October 16, 2017. On September 25, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a content-certified mail requesting the return of deposit for lease and the payment of director expenses, and sent it to the Defendant around that time.
Accordingly, on September 27, 2017, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the expiration date of the lease term of this case by content-certified mail, which is December 23, 2017, so it is impossible to refund the lease deposit and pay the director expenses.
E. After filing the instant lawsuit on October 11, 2017, the Plaintiff moved from the instant apartment to another place on October 16, 2017.
F. On December 26, 2017, the Defendant remitted KRW 73,983,728 to the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting the Defendant’s expenses for restoration to the original state, overdue rent, etc. from the deposit for lease of this case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 11, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Parties.