1. The defendant,

A. A building from September 21, 2010 to September 21, 2010 from the Plaintiffs’ amounting to KRW 30,000,00.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence No. 1, No. 2, and No. 3, and there is no counter-proof.

On June 21, 2009, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiffs that the lessor may terminate the lease contract (hereinafter “the lease agreement of this case”) from June 21, 2009 to June 30, 200, monthly rent of KRW 1,320,000, and the period of lease from June 21, 2009 to June 21, 2009.

B. From August 21, 2010, the Defendant did not pay monthly rent under the instant lease agreement.

C. The Plaintiffs stated in the instant complaint that the Defendant did not pay monthly rent for the instant lease agreement, thereby terminating the instant lease agreement. The duplicate of the instant complaint was served on April 25, 2016 on the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. We examine the plaintiffs' assertion, and examine the above facts. The lease contract of this case was terminated as a delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case since the defendant did not pay monthly rent from August 21, 2010. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiffs as restoration duty.

In addition, the security deposit received in the lease of real estate guarantees all the lessee's obligations under the lease, such as rent and damage liability arising from the loss of, damage to, etc. of an object, and the amount equivalent to the secured obligation is naturally deducted from the security deposit without any separate declaration of intention, unless there are special circumstances when the object is returned after the termination of the lease relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da50729, Dec. 7, 1999). The Defendant’s monthly payment to the Plaintiffs.