1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff claimed the return of down payment and the cost of manufacturing signboards against the Defendant. The first instance court accepted the claim for the return of down payment and dismissed the claim for the cost of manufacturing signboards.

In this regard, the defendant only appealed against the claim for the return of down payment, which is subject to the judgment of this court, is limited to the claim for the return of the quoted down payment.

2. Basic facts

A. On August 24, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the condition that the Plaintiff’s store of the first floor located in Seo-gu, Daegu-gu (hereinafter “instant store”) owned by the Defendant is KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 600,000. The Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on August 29, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) under which the agreement was entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the following terms: (a) the removal of the hot-project floor of the instant store; (b) the removal of the front floor; (c) the opening of the front floor; (d) the extension of the kitchen partition; (d) the installation of the toilet screen; and (e) the repair of the window (hereinafter “instant repair agreement”).

B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 1,00,000,000 to the Defendant as a down payment under the instant lease agreement, which is part of the deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000.

C. After entering into a contract with a construction business operator D for the instant repair work, the Defendant performed part of the construction work, but the conflict with D due to the occurrence of conflict with D, and the construction was suspended, and the instant repair work was not completed until August 29, 2016.

On September 3, 2016, the Defendant proposed that the Plaintiff directly perform the instant repair work, as the Plaintiff would reduce the deposit amount of the instant lease contract to KRW 5,000,000,000.

E. On September 5, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease agreement, and notified the termination of the instant lease agreement with the content certification on September 12, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

3. The Parties.