1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 16, 2012, the Plaintiff leased the leased object to the Defendant of Sejong Special Metropolitan City C Apartment 614 Dong 901 and below, as follows:

hereinafter referred to as "the instant lease agreement"

1. Boli premium: The long-term repair appropriations of KRW 150,000: The lease period of KRW 571,700: Matters stipulated by a special agreement between October 25, 2012 and October 24, 2014;

3. To restore facilities to their original state upon the expiration of the lease term (excluding the mother of a household and the mother of a household).

B. The instant lease agreement was renewed once.

On October 25, 2016, the original Defendant decided to return the leased object of this case to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff agreed to pay the deposit to the Defendant on the same day.

C. On October 25, 2016, the Plaintiff returned the leased object of this case from the Defendant. On the same day, the Plaintiff returned the deposit of KRW 150,000,000 and the long-term repair appropriations of KRW 571,700 to the Defendant.

On November 7, 2016, the Plaintiff’s wife sent a text message to the Defendant’s wife, to the effect that the Defendant’s wife is golded. As such, the Plaintiff’s wife sent a text message to the Defendant’s wife.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff, as a result of the determination on the cause of the claim, has destroyed the singke market of the leased object of this case, and thus, the Plaintiff claimed consolation money due to its repair cost and mental damage.

In light of the nature of a lease agreement that aims to use real estate for a long time, the damage to the mother is naturally planned, and the normal value reduction arising therefrom is deemed as necessary expenses such as depreciation or repair cost, and thus, it is deemed that the lessee is already included in the rent. Therefore, there is no cause attributable to the lessee for the damage to the mother of the object arising from the use and profit-making by ordinary methods, and this is included in the scope of the lessee’