1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. The first floor of the building indicated in the separate sheet at the same time as receiving KRW 2,500,000 from the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From July 11, 2017, the Plaintiff acquired ownership by fully paying the sales price for the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by C and D, which was owned by C and D, during the voluntary auction procedure (Dacheon District Court Branch Branch B).

B. On June 26, 2012, the Defendant, from June 26, 2012, set the lease deposit of KRW 102 [Attachment Form 1, 2, 4, 3, and 1] among the instant building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) to lease KRW 6.05 square meters connected each point of (a) on the ship, 6.05 square meters, which was connected each point of 1,00,000 won, and 50,0000 won per rent (hereinafter “instant lease”) in the said commercial building, has been running its business in the said commercial building.

C. When the Plaintiff acquired ownership of the building of this case, the Defendant’s delayed payment amounting to five million won in total under the instant lease agreement.

On October 14, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease contract with regard to 101 among the instant building, setting the lease deposit of KRW 10 million, KRW 2.2 million per month, and the lease term from October 12, 2017 to October 11, 2019. Accordingly, the Defendant moved from the instant commercial building to the above 101 until the present.

E. The Defendant demanded the return of the deposit for the commercial building of this case, and completed the registration of the right to lease of commercial building of this case (hereinafter “registration of the right to lease of this case”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time the Plaintiff asserted that the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement was extinguished due to the Defendant’s overdue rent, and the additional overdue rent was remaining in excess of 5 million won, and since the lease deposit continues to exist even after the Plaintiff acquired the ownership, the Plaintiff’s claim was made.