2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3.Paragraph 1.

A. On March 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the lease deposit amounting to KRW 59,00,000, and the term of lease from March 19, 2013 to March 18, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and paid the lease deposit to the Defendant around that time.

B. The instant lease agreement expired on March 18, 2015.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the instant lease contract was terminated on March 18, 2015, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to refund KRW 59,000,000 to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

3. The defendant's argument as to the defendant's assertion argues to the purport that it is improper to make the plaintiff's claim in this case, even though the plaintiff has a preferential right to pay for the public auction procedure for the real estate of this case, after the public auction is completed,

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff suspended the return of the lease deposit until the completion of the public auction procedure, and the circumstance that the public auction procedure is in progress cannot be deemed a justifiable ground for refusing the return of the deposit.

The defendant's argument is without merit.

4. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.