1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following dismissals, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

The 5th 13th 13th 15th 15th 15th 15th 15th 16th 16th 16th 16th 16th 16th 2nd 3th 3th 3th 3th 3th 202.

The second below of the judgment of the first instance court is "542,142,736 won" to be "542,142,738 won."

The 7th judgment of the first instance court "2010 U.S. P. 149" shall be deemed to be "2010 U.S. 149".

The 7thm through 11thm of the judgment of the first instance shall be conducted in the following manner:

The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim for the return of the instant lease deposit cannot be deemed to have expressed his/her intent to cancel the instant lease agreement solely on the ground that the Plaintiff reported the instant claim for the return of the lease deposit as a bankruptcy claim. However, the claim for the return of the lease deposit can only be claimed after the termination of the lease agreement, and even at the time when the Defendant was declared bankrupt for more than three years and six months from January 30, 207, the date when the instant lease agreement was concluded, the funeral home and E Hospital Corporation, which was the starting date of business under the instant lease, was not completed, and it is difficult to expect the Defendant to properly perform his/her obligation under the instant lease agreement. However, in light of the fact that it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff had the intent to continue the instant lease agreement without being returned the deposit already paid under the circumstances where the Plaintiff could not be deemed to have known, and rather, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff had expressed his/her intent to cancel the instant lease agreement and return the deposit as a bankruptcy claim (based on the Plaintiff’s assertion).