1. The counterclaim Defendant: 26,321,60 won to the counterclaim and 5% per annum from June 17, 2016 to August 29, 2016.

Basic Facts

On December 29, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the counterclaim Defendant on KRW 406.59 square meters of a six-story private teaching institute (hereinafter “instant real estate”) among the buildings listed in the attached Table list, with the content that the lease deposit is KRW 50 million, KRW 2.9 million per month, KRW 2.9 million per month, and the term of lease from December 29, 2014 to December 31, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”), and operated the private teaching institute in the instant real estate after paying the deposit to the counterclaim Defendant.

On September 15, 2015, water leakage has occurred in the ceiling of the instant real estate, and private teaching institutes, lecture rooms, and various clusters have been flooded.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant number”). Around September 20, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) suspended the operation of a private teaching institute; and (b) around September 24, 2015, notified the counterclaim Defendant of his/her intention not to renew the instant lease agreement after December 31, 2015, when the instant lease agreement term expires.

On June 15, 2016, the Counterclaim Defendant delivered the instant real estate to the Counterclaim Defendant, and on June 16, 2016, the Counterclaim Defendant returned KRW 23,678,340 as the deposit to the Counterclaim Defendant.

【In the absence of dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence, Eul 1-2 evidence, Eul 1-2 evidence, and plaintiff 1-2 on September 15, 2015 on the ground of the termination of the judgment-based lease contract as to the cause of claim as a whole of the pleadings, it became impossible for the plaintiff 1 to operate a private teaching institute any longer due to water leakage in the ceiling of the instant real estate.

Accordingly, the obligation to maintain the conditions necessary for the use and profit of the lessor was impossible, and the lease contract of this case was naturally terminated without the lessee’s declaration of termination.

Therefore, the counterclaim defendant is obligated to return the remaining deposit amount of 26,321,660 won and damages for delay to the counterclaim.

Judgment

In the lease contract, the lessor bears the duty of repair during the existence of the contract, and damages the object.