보증금반환
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
3. The decision of the court of first instance is in accordance with paragraph 1.
1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 1, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on October 7, 201 with respect to about about about 20,00 of the second floor among the second floor building B in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, with a lease deposit of about 60,00,000, and between November 6, 201 and November 5, 2013, and paid a deposit of KRW 60,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant paid a deposit of KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff on May 9, 2014.
According to the above facts, the above lease contract was terminated on November 5, 2013.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return the unpaid lease deposit amount of KRW 59,000,000 (=60,000,000-1,000,000) to the plaintiff.
On May 9, 2014, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff for the payment of KRW 1,00,000 and to extend the lease term until November 15, 2015. However, as acknowledged earlier, the Defendant paid KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff on May 9, 2014, but according to the overall purport of the statement and pleading in the evidence No. 6, the Plaintiff sent text messages to the Defendant on May 21, 2014, requesting the return of KRW 59,00,000 to the Defendant. Thus, the payment of KRW 1,00,000 is deemed to have been paid as part of the lease deposit, and there is no evidence to prove that the lease term has been extended as otherwise alleged by the Defendant. Therefore, the above Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
2. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case should be accepted because it is reasonable, and the decision of the court of first instance that concluded as a result of the reduction of claim in the court of appeal is justifiable, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.
However, the decision of the court of first instance is delivered in accordance with the decision of the court of first instance since it was modified in accordance with the decision of the court of first instance by reduction of claims in the party.