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. Basic facts

A. On September 4, 2013, the Defendant drafted a lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, setting the lease term of KRW 10,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 550,00, and KRW 2 years from October 4, 2013, with the content that the lease term of KRW 10,000, KRW 304, the Defendant owned by the Defendant.

B. However, a person who actually resided in the above house during the above lease period and paid rent to the defendant was not the plaintiff.

However, on October 4, 2013, the Plaintiff lent 10,000,000 won of the above lease deposit to D, but entered the Plaintiff, not D, in the name of the lessee under the contract for securing the above loan claim.

C. After the expiration of the above lease term, the Defendant paid the remaining security deposit after deducting the overdue loan from D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff is a genuine lessee of the instant lease agreement, and the Defendant shall pay the lease deposit to the Plaintiff.

B. Even if the Plaintiff was not a genuine lessee, the Defendant is also aware of the claim for the refund of the lease deposit from D as security of the loan claim against D, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the lease deposit to the Plaintiff other than D.

3. Determination

A. Even if the tenant stated in the lease agreement of this case as the plaintiff, the person who actually resided in the lease period and paid the rent to the defendant is as seen earlier, and the plaintiff himself/herself also stated in the contract in his/her name as the tenant in order to secure the loan claim against D. Thus, the actual tenant of the lease contract of this case is not the plaintiff but D.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Meu1696, Nov. 22, 1983). Therefore, the Defendant’s allegation in this part is without merit.

B. The defendant is located in D.