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

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff delayed the payment of KRW 35,200,00 for eight-month rent for the Defendant, management fee and electricity fee of KRW 2,278,714 at the time of delivering the instant commercial building to the Defendant; the fact that the Defendant repaid KRW 24,00,000 to the Plaintiff around July 2006 does not conflict between the parties.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above annual rent, management fee, and electricity fee (i.e., KRW 100,000,000 - KRW 24,000,000 - KRW 35,200,000 - 2,278,714) and the interest in arrears.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant would have deducted KRW 200,000 from the above lease deposit by reducing the above overdue rent of KRW 35,200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. (1) Although the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to increase the rent for the instant commercial building by 5% each year, the Plaintiff did not pay the said increase, so the Plaintiff is obliged to deduct 2.64 million won (4 million won x 5% x 12 months) corresponding to the said increase out of the lease deposit that the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff.

on June 30, 2003, the Defendant repaid to the Plaintiff KRW 35 million out of the lease deposit of this case.

Consolidated, the Plaintiff brought an action of this case seeking the payment of the lease deposit against the Defendant on July 1, 2013 after the lapse of ten years from June 30, 2003, which was delivered to the Defendant. The Plaintiff’s right to claim the return of the lease deposit against the Defendant is limited by the statute of limitations.