임대차보증금
1. The defendant would pay 60,000,000 won to the plaintiff at the same time as the delivery of the Category E of the D Building from the plaintiff in Sungsung City.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. In 2016, the Defendant delegated F Co., Ltd. (F) with the authority related to the lease of D Building E (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant, to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), all matters related to lease, such as lease of D Building E (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) during the guarantee period, the payment of rent for the lease deposit, the amount and management of the lease deposit, the lessee’s physical color and selection, the lease promotion, the lease management (form of the contract), and the household inspection
(A) Evidence 2. (b)
On July 5, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for leasing F on behalf of the Defendant, and the instant real estate by setting the rental deposit of KRW 60 million, KRW 100,000 per month of rent, and the period from July 24, 2017 to July 23, 2018.
(C) On July 24, 2017, the Plaintiff paid a down payment of KRW 2.5 million to the bank account designated by F, and paid the remainder KRW 57.5 million on July 24, 2017.
After that, on July 30, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the extension of the said lease term from July 24, 2018 to July 23, 2019.
C. On June 17, 2019, the Plaintiff indicated the intent to cancel the lease and demanded the Defendant to refund the deposit, and the said lease term expired as of July 23, 2019.
[Evidence: Evidence No. 1 to 13, Evidence No. 1, All purport of oral argument]
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, since the lease of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the term, the defendant is obligated to return the security deposit of 60 million won as well as the delivery of the real estate from the plaintiff.
B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant merely granted F the right of representation to enter into a lease deposit of KRW 10 million and KRW 6 million for monthly rent, and did not grant the right of representation on the lease deposit of KRW 60 million as in the instant lease. Moreover, the Defendant did not receive KRW 57,500,000 from the above lease deposit. Accordingly, according to the facts and evidence acknowledged prior to the determination, the Defendant did not have the right of reimbursement on the said lease deposit.