1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 25,00,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from September 10, 2015 to November 20, 2015; and (b) the Plaintiff.

In full view of Gap's statement and the purport of the whole argument as to the cause of claim Gap 1-5, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on July 11, 2013, stipulating that the plaintiff shall deliver the above 201 unit to the defendant on September 9, 2015 and lease deposit amount of KRW 102,201,00,000,000 and July 10, 2015, which are owned by the defendant, and that the plaintiff shall not renew the lease agreement. The lease agreement was terminated because it was delivered on July 10, 2015, and the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff delivered the above 201 unit to the defendant on September 9, 2015 and moved out.

According to the above facts, since the above lease contract was terminated upon the expiration of the period, the defendant is obligated to refund the above lease deposit amount of KRW 110 million to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff is obligated to refund the remaining lease deposit amount of KRW 85 million from the defendant, so the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remainder of the lease deposit of KRW 25 million (=10 million - 85 million) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from September 10, 2015 to November 20, 2015, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, from September 10, 2015 to November 20, 2015, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, and the next day to the day of full payment.

(A) The Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of damages for delay from September 9, 2015, the delivery date, but it shall be deemed that the repayment date from the day immediately following the delivery date, due to the simultaneous performance of the obligation to return the lease deposit and the obligation to return the leased object. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay on the premise that the due date has arrived from the delivery date, cannot be accepted). As to the Defendant’s claim on the assertion, the Defendant’s claim for damages for delay on the foregoing portion shall not be accepted: KRW 5 million, which was actually paid on June 15, 2013; KRW 5 million, which was paid on July 11, 2013; and KRW 40 million paid on July 11, 2013.