1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On March 11, 2011, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the condition that the lease deposit of KRW 40,000,000 for Pyeongtaek-si apartment 104 and 103 is from April 10, 201 to April 9, 2013; the down payment of KRW 3,000,000 is paid on the date of the contract; the remainder of KRW 37,000,000 is paid by April 10, 201; and the Plaintiff did not receive the remainder of KRW 37,00,000 under the said lease agreement from the Defendant.

Nevertheless, on June 10, 2013, after the expiration of the lease term, the Plaintiff returned KRW 40,000,000 to the Defendant. Of this, KRW 37,000,000 in this case constitutes unjust enrichment and thus, the Plaintiff seeks the return of the lease deposit.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including each number), and witness Eul's testimony, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant as his/her agent on March 11, 201 with regard to the lease deposit of KRW 40,000,000 for Pyeongtaek-si apartment No. 104 and 103, and the term of lease from April 10, 201 to April 9, 2013 (hereinafter "the instant lease agreement"). The plaintiff received KRW 3,00,000 from the defendant as the date of the contract, and the defendant received KRW 3,00,00 from the defendant to pay the balance under the instant lease agreement on April 10, 201, the amount of KRW 30,000,000 and KRW 10,000,000 for the Check No. 30,000 (No. 7,000).

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is without merit, under the premise that the Plaintiff did not receive the remainder of the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement from the Defendant.

2. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, since the plaintiff's claim of this case is without merit.