1. The Defendant’s judgment against the Plaintiff on the case of return of the deposit money for lease on a deposit basis is rendered by the Janyang-si District Court 2017Gau17441.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 9, 2018, the judgment citing KRW 5,000, which is a part of the claim amount (hereinafter “instant judgment”) was rendered on May 9, 2018 by the Defendant against the Plaintiff, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 13, 2018.

B. The Defendant filed an application for a compulsory auction with Seoul Northern District Court C on the real estate owned by the Plaintiff with the title of execution, and on November 11, 2019, the Plaintiff deposited the repayment deposit (hereinafter “instant deposit”) with the Seoul Northern District Court C in totaling KRW 7,169,124 (the costs of compulsory execution are KRW 851,317) as the sum of the principal and interest and the costs of compulsory execution pursuant to the instant judgment under the Seoul East East District Court Decision 2019No3597, Nov. 1, 2019

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Appropriateness of the request;

A. According to the above facts, the principal and damages for delay until November 11, 2019 according to the judgment of this case, and the expenses for compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case were fully paid by the deposit of this case.

Therefore, the obligation according to the final judgment of this case was extinguished.

Therefore, compulsory execution should not be permitted in accordance with the final judgment of this case.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserted that compulsory execution based on the instant judgment should be permitted until the costs of compulsory execution are additionally paid, since the service charge of KRW 288,00 and the auction deposit amount of KRW 1,162,260, out of the costs of compulsory execution based on the instant judgment.

According to the evidence evidence Nos. 6 and 7, the defendant's expenses incurred in the actual execution of compulsory execution among the expenses prepaid by the defendant are included in the amount deposited for repayment. As examined earlier, the plaintiff's debt relating to principal and interest and expenses incurred in compulsory execution according to the judgment of this case has ceased to exist with the deposit for repayment of this case, and the defendant's assertion is acceptable.