1. The defendant shall pay 65,000,000 won to the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit.

① On July 15, 2015, the Plaintiff’s lease of the second floor detached house of 84.48 square meters, among the buildings indicated in the attached Table, was determined and leased by the Defendant until July 23, 2017, with a lease deposit of 65 million won and monthly rent of 84.48 square meters; ② the Plaintiff paid the lease deposit to the Defendant around that time, occupied the leased object; ③ the Defendant was unable to refund the said lease deposit even after the said lease term expires; ③ the Defendant was unable to refund the said lease deposit even after the said lease term expires; and the Defendant again agreed to return the deposit to the Plaintiff by up to October 24, 2019 and failed to perform the said return even after the said lease term expires.

[Reasons for Recognition: Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act (Voluntary Confession). According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to return the above lease deposit to the plaintiff.

In addition, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of damages for delay on the above lease deposit, but the lessor’s obligation to return the lease deposit and the lessee’s obligation to return the leased object simultaneously. ② At the date of the instant pleading, the Plaintiff stated as follows: “On the date of the instant pleading, the Plaintiff transferred the Plaintiff’s resident registration on the leased object as of the date of the closure of pleadings, and instead, the Plaintiff’s husband took the move-in report, the Plaintiff’s husband was removed from the Plaintiff’s temporary domicile, and the key is in the custody of the Defendant’s warehouse, and the Defendant used to show his house if the Plaintiff was located in the joint location, and the key is located in the joint location.” Accordingly, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff delivered the leased object to the Defendant (only if the Defendant agreed to “the Plaintiff’s restoration of the status of the Plaintiff’s possession,” as seen below, there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise. ③ According to the Plaintiff’s written evidence No. 2, the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the lease deposit to the Plaintiff on July 28, 2018.