A. On February 18, 2011, the Plaintiff leased the entire two-storys of the two-storys (hereinafter “instant leased houses”) from the Defendants during the period from the period from February 22, 201 to February 21, 2013, with the deposit amount of KRW 40,00,000, and the lease period of KRW 20,000.

B. On February 22, 2011, the Plaintiff paid a deposit of KRW 40,000,000 to the Defendants, and received the instant leased house. On January 30, 2014, the Plaintiff returned the instant leased house to the Defendants.

[Grounds for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount of KRW 40,000,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act until November 1, 2014, Defendant B, the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case from March 27, 2014 to May 28, 2014, Defendant C, who is the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case from March 27, 2014 to the date of repayment, barring any special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The Defendants asserted to the effect that, as they agreed to pay interest of KRW 300,000 for delay in the return of deposit, the part claiming damages for delay is groundless.

The fact that the Defendants paid KRW 300,000 to the Plaintiff as interest for delay in the return of deposit does not conflict between the parties.

(1) The Defendants’ assertion to the effect that KRW 300,000 was agreed with all damages for delay is difficult to accept, as there is no clear evidence to acknowledge whether the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendants to waive interest on the remainder of the deposit.

B. Next, the Defendants did not return to the original state, such as the flag of the leased house of this case.