1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant, from the plaintiff, is netcheon-si C Apartment D.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 6, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant for the lease deposit of KRW 70,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 10,000, and the lease term of KRW 6,000 from December 6, 2013 to December 5, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). At that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 70,000,000 to the Defendant.

B. Around December 2014, the instant lease agreement was renewed by setting the lease term as one year (from December 6, 2014 to December 5, 2015) and renewed on December 4, 2015 as one year (from December 6, 2015 to December 5, 2015), and was renewed on December 2, 2016 as one year (from December 6, 2016 to December 5, 2017).

C. On December 27, 2016, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with F to sell the instant apartment in KRW 92,00,000, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with F on January 6, 2017.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff did not directly reside in the apartment of this case and had his/her own Dong live therein, and completed the move-in report on the apartment of this case on January 9, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4 and Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts as to the assertion on the cause of claim, the instant lease agreement is recognized to have been terminated on December 5, 2017, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 70,000,000 to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant should bear damages for delay of KRW 70,000,000 for lease deposit. As seen earlier, the Defendant’s obligation to return the lease deposit is concurrently performed with the Plaintiff’s obligation to deliver the instant apartment, and it cannot be said that the Defendant’s obligation to return the lease deposit was delayed.