1. The defendant shall pay the plaintiff KRW 60,000,000.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 27, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 70,000,000, and the lease period of February 26, 2017, between Seongbuk-gu Seoul and the Defendant on the multi-household D, a multi-family multi-family house for three parcels, other than Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, and the Defendant.

B. On February 26, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to extend the term of the said lease by six months until August 26, 2017.

(hereinafter) The Plaintiff and the Defendant included the lease agreement concluded on February 26, 2015 and the lease agreement extended for six months as above (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1-2, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion was terminated on August 26, 2017, and the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to return KRW 70,000,000 as the lease deposit stipulated under the above lease agreement, but the Defendant borrowed KRW 10,000,000 from the Defendant on July 15, 2014, and thus, the Defendant was to pay only KRW 60,000,000.

However, around 2013, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 10,00,000 from the Defendant’s wife and only repaid the above amount on October 15 of the same year, and there is no fact that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 10,000,000 from the Defendant on July 15, 2014.

On July 15, 2014, the Defendant continued to refuse to submit a loan certificate with the purport that the Plaintiff borrowed. On October 6, 2017, the Defendant infringed upon the Plaintiff’s house without permission and forged the Plaintiff’s seal and then submitted it to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff is not only obligated to prepare a separate loan certificate to the Defendant, but also did not borrow KRW 10,00,000 from the Defendant on July 15, 2014. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to refund KRW 70,000,000 to the Plaintiff upon the termination of the instant lease agreement.

B. On July 15, 2014, the Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion: (a) lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff in cash; and (b) the Plaintiff’s loan certificate Party A prepared by the Defendant.