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. Basic facts

A. On May 7, 2015, C, the Plaintiff’s father, set the lease deposit of KRW 130 million and the period from June 30, 2015 to June 30, 2017, leased the lease deposit of KRW 130,000,000,000 from the Defendant’s Gyeonggi-gun Group D’s land owned by the Defendant (the instant house), and paid the down payment of KRW 13,00,000 to the Defendant on the date of the contract.

(B) The instant lease agreement.

The assistant of a licensed real estate agent who arranged the conclusion of a contract at the time of the instant lease agreement is about KRW 350,000,000,000 for the market price of the instant housing, and provided an explanation that the right to collateral security was established, which is about KRW 169,000,000,000 for the mortgagee of the instant housing and the maximum debt amount.

In addition, with a special contract of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant paid the secured debt amounting to KRW 10 million out of the secured debt ( principal amounting to KRW 130 million) of the said secured debt (the secured debt amounting to KRW 130 million) to lower the secured debt amount.

(Paragraph 4) c. of the instant lease agreement

C was scheduled to pay the balance of the lease deposit of the existing leased house with the return of the lease deposit, but it was difficult to pay the balance due to the failure to lease the existing leased house.

Therefore, C around June 9, 2015, at the same time, succeeded to the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiff and sought the consent of the lessor through the licensed real estate agent.

On June 19, 2015, the latter is identical to the terms and conditions of the instant lease agreement. However, one copy of the lease agreement (No. 2-1) that the lessee changed to the Plaintiff, and one copy of the lease agreement (No. 9) that the lessee changed to the Plaintiff, and one copy of the lease agreement (No. 2-1), respectively, was written on July 6, 2015.

E. The Plaintiff applied for a loan to pay the balance of the lease deposit of this case with a loan borrowed from the bank in the city of Jung-gu. However, the Plaintiff was notified that prior priority was established over the amount of security over the market price of the instant house, and thus, it cannot cause the loan of the lease fund.

F. The Plaintiff’s refusal to lend a bank.