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. According to the overall purport of Gap 2, 4, 8, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, the plaintiff leased 502 out of the lease deposit deposit amount of 52 million won and the lease term of 12 months from Busan Jung-gu, Busan (hereinafter "the building in this case") owned by the plaintiff on April 11, 2012, and the above building was delivered on the same day. The moving-in report was completed on April 18, 2012. The owner of the building 502 units of the building in this case shall be changed to F on May 15, 2012, and on March 28, 2014, the plaintiff shall be entitled to exchange deposit amount of 502 units of the building in this case between F and F on May 18, 2014, and the owner of the building in this case shall be entitled to pay the above exchange deposit amount of 502 units of G to 300 million won and 205 billion won (hereinafter "the above lease term of G No. 201.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant succeeded to the lessor status of the aforementioned 502 subparagraph through F and G pursuant to Article 3(4) of the Housing Lease Protection Act, and the instant lease agreement has expired due to the expiration of the period, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to refund the lease deposit to the Plaintiff KRW 52 million.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to the assertion on the invalidity of the instant exchange contract by deception of G, the Defendant may respond to the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that the instant exchange contract was concluded by deception, such as forging the lease contract for the tenants located in the instant building in collusion with G, and forging the lease contract for the tenants located in the instant building by the J, the president of the brokerage office, etc.