임차보증금반환
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On March 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) around 3, 2016, the lease deposit for the Yangcheon-gu Seoul apartment 802 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by the Defendant was KRW 190 million; (b) the lessee, who was living at the time of the payment, agreed to divide and pay the deposit until the said apartment is delivered; and (c) the Defendant’s new bank account was transferred KRW 15 million over eight times; and (d) the amount of KRW 6 million is paid directly by the Defendant’s card price, KRW 16.1 million, property tax, KRW 3052,850, and KRW 40,152,850, which became impossible to implement the said lease due to changes in circumstances thereafter, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the deposit money, KRW 40,152,850, which was paid in the name of the deposit.
2. On the other hand, the Plaintiff sought a security deposit under the already-paid lease agreement on the ground that the lease agreement with the Defendant was invalidated on the premise of the lease agreement with the Defendant. However, there is no evidence to deem that the lease agreement with the Plaintiff was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and it is difficult to recognize whether the Plaintiff actually paid the amount to the Defendant regardless of whether the amount was the security deposit or not.
As such, the plaintiff's claim is without merit. A.
There is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement on the instant apartment with the content that the Plaintiff would substitute for the lease deposit with the content that the deposit amount to be returned to the lessee at the time of the instant apartment, including the lease contract, was to be paid by the Plaintiff.
B. Although examining the amount that the Plaintiff paid as part of the deposit, it is nothing more than that of the Plaintiff upon the request of the Defendant that the Plaintiff did not receive the following money, and the tax payment is nothing more than that of the Plaintiff upon the request of the Defendant.