1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff, or Plaintiff for retrial).

1. Following the conclusion of the judgment subject to a retrial, the facts are apparent in records or obvious to this court.

On April 27, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendant for the payment order against the Defendant, claiming for the payment of the unclaimed lease deposit amounting to KRW 10 million, and the delay damages for the unclaimed lease deposit with respect to the Jincheon-si, Jincheon-si, Seoul District Court (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in lieu of filing a lawsuit.

In this regard, the defendant argued that the cost of restoring the apartment of this case, which is the object of lease, should be deducted.

B. On December 20, 2018, the first instance court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and declared a judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim.

(J) Jincheon-si District Court 2018 Ghana144, Jincheon-si, Seoul High Court c.

On May 3, 2019, the defendant appealed against the above judgment, and filed a counterclaim against the plaintiff for the payment of KRW 2 million with the cost of restoring the apartment of this case to its original state.

On October 24, 2019, the appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing all of the defendant's appeal and counterclaim claims.

[Judgment on Review] Changwon District Court Decision 2019Na184 (principal suit), 2019Na55160 (Counterclaim), and hereinafter “Judgment on Review”). Defendant was served with an authentic copy of the judgment subject to review on October 30, 2019.

Although the Defendant appealed against the above judgment, on January 16, 2020, the final appeal was dismissed (Supreme Court Decision 2019Da29747, 2019Da29754, 20754). On January 20, 2020, the final judgment subject to final judgment became final and conclusive by being served on the Defendant’s certified copy of the judgment dismissing the final appeal.

2. Whether the litigation for retrial of this case is legitimate

A. The gist of the first defendant’s argument on the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act as follows.

(1) The defendant shall enter into an agreement with the plaintiff on February 28, 2018 for the repayment of deposit.