1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 2010, the Plaintiff leased the Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D ground building (hereinafter “instant building”) as a deposit of KRW 100 million and monthly rent of KRW 15 million (a value-added tax separate) from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). (b) On July 2, 2019, the Defendant sold the instant building to Nonparty E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).

E completed the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant building on August 28, 2019.

(c)

The Defendant, around July 4, 2019, did not pay the Plaintiff the rent of KRW 67.5 million to the Plaintiff, thus terminating the instant contract.

On July 2, 2019, the Defendant sold the instant building to E, and the Defendant’s rights and obligations under the instant contract were acquired by E.

By September 20, 2019, the Plaintiff sent a certified mail to the purport that “the instant building is transferred to E”.

The above notification reached the Plaintiff on July 5, 2019.

(d)

The Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant KRW 4 million on July 3, 2019, and KRW 3 million on July 5, 2019.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 2-4, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant contract was terminated by the Defendant’s notice of termination on July 4, 2019, and the Plaintiff delivered the instant building to E on January 31, 2020.

Therefore, the Defendant, a lessor under the instant contract, should return to the Plaintiff the remainder of the lease deposit of KRW 32.5 million (i.e., KRW 100 million - KRW 67.5 million in arrears as expressed by the Defendant in the notice of termination) and KRW 7 million paid to the Defendant for rent after the termination of the instant contract (see the foregoing basic facts D.).

B. (1) Although the transfer of the lessor’s status in a lease agreement on the part of claim for the return of KRW 32.5 million entails the transfer of the lessor’s obligation, the lessor’s obligation does not vary specifically by whom the lessor is authorized.