1. The defendant shall pay the plaintiff KRW 40,000,000.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3.Paragraph 1.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 21, 2009, the Plaintiff leased, from the Defendant, Leecheon-si, C Apartment 101, 808 (hereinafter “instant apartment”), KRW 40,000,000, and the period from September 10, 2009 to September 11, 201, the Plaintiff paid KRW 4,00,000 out of the above lease deposit to the Defendant on the same day, and paid KRW 36,00,000,000 on September 10, 209.

B. The above lease has been implicitly renewed after the expiration of the period of validity.

C. On January 4, 2008, the Suwon District Court transferred the registration of the establishment of a new mortgage on a national bank as of January 4, 2008, No. 595, and No. 596. D.

On June 9, 2010, the National Bank of Korea issued a voluntary decision to commence the auction on the apartment of this case to D on the basis of the above collateral security by the National Bank of Korea. In the above auction procedure, Nonparty E purchased the apartment on July 1, 2014, and issued a delivery order to the Plaintiff on September 15, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, in the auction procedure for the apartment of this case, E acquired the ownership of the apartment of this case on July 1, 2014, and the Defendant was unable to perform its duty as a lessor who would cause the Plaintiff to use and benefit from the apartment of this case, the lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated at that time.

I would like to say.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 40,000,000 to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

B. On the premise that the plaintiff is a tenant with opposing power, the defendant asserts that the defendant's obligation to return the lease deposit to the plaintiff is extinguished by succession to E, the successful bidder, or that the plaintiff's negligence, which did not demand a distribution, should be taken into account. However, in case where the real estate for auction purpose is sold at auction,