1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The plaintiff asserted that on July 2006, the plaintiff leased the first floor 101 of the building in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the lease deposit of 5 million won, monthly rent of 300,000 won (hereinafter "the lease contract in this case"), and the above store was returned to the defendant on March 2008 at the defendant's request that is the lessor. Since the plaintiff was not refunded 80,000,000 won from the defendant, the plaintiff sought the return of the lease deposit.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the return of the deposit amount of the lease contract of this case, and the defendant filed a counterclaim against the plaintiff for the payment of rent in arrears from December 4, 2006 to November 15, 2007 (Seoul Southern District Court 2007Gaso113616, 207Gaso290346 (Counterclaim)). The above court dismissed the plaintiff's claim on February 12, 2008, and rendered a judgment of "the plaintiff shall pay the defendant 3,493,168 and delay damages to the plaintiff" upon the defendant's counterclaim.

Although the plaintiff appealed against the above judgment (Seoul Southern District Court 2008Na3560, 2008Na3577 (Counterclaim), the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on July 3, 2008, and the plaintiff filed a second appeal (Supreme Court 2008Da65280, 208Da65297 (Counterclaim))). The Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on December 11, 2008, which became final and conclusive.

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant lease contract was terminated on January 28, 2009 due to the Plaintiff’s delinquency in rent, against which the Defendant filed a claim for unjust enrichment equivalent to KRW 300,000 per month from November 16, 2007 to the delivery of the leased portion of the instant lease and from the time of delivery of the leased portion (Seoul Southern Southern District Court 2008Gadan114339), and the said court rendered a judgment that accepted the Defendant’s claim on April 8, 2009 in entirety.

Accordingly, the plaintiff appealed against the plaintiff (Seoul Southern District Court 2009Na4669), and the above court on November 12, 2009.