1. The defendant shall pay the plaintiff KRW 60,000,000.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

Facts of recognition

On October 7, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between C and C on 60,000,000 won as security deposit, from October 8, 2009 to October 7, 2011, with a special agreement between C and C, which provides that “When the sale is made before the expiration of the contract, the directors shall be the conditions for the director, and the director’s expenses (one million won) shall be paid from DD.”

On October 8, 2009, the Plaintiff paid 6,000,000 won out of the lease deposit, and 50,800,000 won out of the lease deposit, respectively, to C, and the remaining 3,200,000 won paid all the lease deposit in the way of offsetting C’s claim for the payment of the royalties.

On October 8, 2009, the Plaintiff’s reference E completed a move-in report with the instant house, and began to reside after being delivered the said house.

On December 31, 2009, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the Fth of December 31, 2009 with respect to the housing of this case. On the same day, the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of KRW 162,200,000 for the maximum debt amount was completed in the future of the

On January 4, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the move-in report with the instant house.

Pungyang Credit Union filed an application for voluntary auction on the instant housing and rendered a voluntary decision to commence auction to G on December 27, 2010. In the above auction procedure, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant housing on June 7, 2012, upon receipt of the decision to permit sale on May 23, 2012.

While the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking the return of the lease deposit (this Court Decision 201Da12968), the Plaintiff was sentenced to a judgment against C on September 11, 201, on the grounds that C’s obligation to return the lease deposit was succeeded to F as the transferee of the instant house, as the Plaintiff acquired the opposing power stipulated by the Housing Lease Protection Act from the above court on September 11, 201, and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

The Plaintiff terminated the lease agreement on the instant house by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint.