임대차보증금
1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 200,000,000 as well as 20% per annum from May 15, 2014 to the date of full payment.
1. Basic facts
A. On December 14, 2012, the Plaintiff and Defendant B entered into a lease agreement between Defendant C and three other parties on a deposit agreement between KRW 250,000,000 for lease deposit and KRW 250,000 for the lease deposit with respect to KRW 54.44 square meters for the first floor of the Do building (the name of the building was changed to E-building on June 19, 2013) in Busan Northern-gu, and between Defendant C and three others (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Around that time, Defendant C paid KRW 250,00,000 for the lease deposit.
B. Of the above lease deposit amounting to KRW 250,00,000, the Plaintiff paid KRW 200,000,000 to Defendant B, and KRW 50,000 to Defendant B, respectively. On January 25, 2013, the Plaintiff and Defendant B agreed to distribute the lease deposit according to the aforementioned respective shares upon termination of the instant lease agreement.
C. On May 16, 2013, Defendant B terminated the instant lease agreement with Defendant C, and was returned from Defendant C in three order, including KRW 30,000,000,000 on the same day, and KRW 100,000,000 on May 20, 2013, and KRW 120,000,000 on May 31, 2013.
[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 5-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant lease contract was terminated, and Defendant B was obligated to return KRW 200,000,000 to the Plaintiff out of the returned lease deposit, and Defendant C, a lessor, was obligated to return the lease deposit according to the share ratio of each joint lessee as to the lease deposit when the lease contract was terminated, but did not notify the Plaintiff, a joint lessee, of the fact that the full amount of the lease deposit was refunded to Defendant B, and thus, Defendant C was obligated to return the lease deposit to the Plaintiff according to the Plaintiff’s share ratio as to the lease deposit, but Defendant C was not aware of the inside share ratio between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. Accordingly, Defendant C and each Plaintiff were obligated to return KRW 125,00,000,000, which amount to KRW 125,000,000, which amount to KRW
(b).