1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following order for payment shall be revoked, and that part shall be revoked.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 21, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant for the lease deposit amounting to KRW 60 million with respect to the building C, and building D owned by the Defendant (the contract amounting to KRW 6 million, the intermediate payment of KRW 30 million, the remainder of KRW 24 million), and the lease term from December 5, 2015 to December 4, 2017.

B. Even after the termination of the lease agreement, the Plaintiff agreed upon the said lease agreement with the Defendant while continuing to reside in the leased object, and delivered the said lease object to the Defendant on May 29, 2018.

C. The first instance court of this case affirmed the Defendant’s lawsuit by public notice, and sentenced the Defendant to “the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 60 million with 15% interest per annum from September 16, 2018 to the day of full payment.”

After the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered, the Defendant returned KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff on November 23, 2018, which was after the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff asserts that all of the lease deposit amount of KRW 60 million (one million in cash out of KRW 50 million in the Defendant’s account and intermediate payment of KRW 30 million) was paid to the Defendant, and sought payment of KRW 10 million which was not returned among them.

Accordingly, the defendant asserts that since the plaintiff received KRW 20 million out of the intermediate payment of KRW 30 million from the plaintiff and paid KRW 50 million in total, the plaintiff does not have a duty to return the remainder of KRW 50 million from the intermediate payment of KRW 30 million and KRW 10 million.

B. First, the fact that the Plaintiff remitted the sum of KRW 2 million on November 21, 2015, KRW 4 million on November 23, 2015, KRW 6 million on November 23, 2015 (a total of KRW 6 million) to the Defendant’s name account, KRW 10 million on November 27, 2015, KRW 10 million on November 28, 2015, KRW 20 million on November 28, 2015 (a total of KRW 20 million) and KRW 50 million on December 5, 2015, there is no dispute between the parties.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff’s intermediate payment to the Defendant 1.