임대차보증금 반환
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff (Lessee) entered into a contract with the defendant on June 4, 2012 to lease money of 20 million won to the plaintiff (hereinafter "the instant lease contract"), the lease deposit money of 20 million won to the defendant from June 12, 2012 to June 11, 2013 (hereinafter "the instant lease contract"), < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 23748, Jul. 14, 2012; Presidential Decree No. 23748, Jun. 14, 2012>
According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the deposit amount of KRW 20 million and delay damages for the lease contract of this case, unless there are special circumstances.
2. Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion, such as the extinguishment of the leased deposit claim
A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion ① The Defendant accumulated business personnel to the extent that he could not pay rent early while operating his business after leasing the instant private house or facility from the owner of the building.
Therefore, the Defendant agreed from the Defendant to waive the lessee’s claim for the return of the lease deposit from each lessee, instead of taking the lessee’s direct operation of each coponer and bring operating profits, between E and the lessee of each coponer (including the Plaintiff) who leased each coponer (including the Plaintiff) of the instant private house or facility.
② Even if not, since the owner of the instant private house or building returns it to the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant, the Defendant did not have any obligation to refund the lease deposit against the Plaintiff with respect to the instant coer any longer.
B. First of all, the Plaintiff’s representative E of the Defendant and lessee shall be the lessee of each copon.