1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. (1) On February 18, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to 501 units of the five-story multi-family house (5-story house) located in C and Gu Government-si (hereinafter “instant multi-family house”) as the broker of B, a licensed real estate agent, with a deposit for lease deposit of KRW 30 million, and around that time, paid KRW 30 million to C.

(2) On the other hand, on May 14, 2009, the instant multi-family house was completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring agricultural cooperative and the maximum debt amount of 650 million won within the right-holder of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the instant multi-family house”). However, while mediating the instant lease, B inspected the certificate of partial registration stated only the matters concerning the ownership of the building among the instant multi-family house, and thereby stated “no corresponding matters” in the legal relationship of the description of confirmation and specification of the object of collateral security (hereinafter “no corresponding matters”).

(3) On October 8, 2013, the Plaintiff, as a small lessee, was paid KRW 20 million out of the deposit amount of the instant lease agreement 30 million, as a small lessee on October 8, 2013. An agricultural cooperative in the instant lease was paid KRW 458,656,532 out of the amount of principal and interest on a claim as a collateral security holder. An agricultural cooperative in the instant lease was paid dividends of KRW 600,019,674 out of KRW 658,656,532 of the amount of principal and interest on a claim.

(4) On February 8, 2012, B, a licensed real estate agent, concluded a mutual aid agreement with the Defendant, setting the deductible amount of KRW 100 million, and the period of coverage from February 12, 2012 to February 11, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the facts of the above recognition, B, a licensed real estate agent, may receive a refund of the deposit for lease after the lease contract is terminated in mediating the instant lease contract on the instant multi-family house.