1. The defendant shall pay KRW 100 million to the plaintiff.

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

3. Paragraph 1 shall be provisionally executed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the period from October 20, 2015 to October 20, 2017, with regard to the Jinjin-si Apartment and D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by the Defendant on September 24, 2015, setting the deposit amount as KRW 100 million, and around that time, the Plaintiff paid the deposit amount to KRW 100 million and resides in the said apartment, and the Plaintiff continuously demanded the return of the deposit after the expiration of the said term of lease.

According to the above facts, the above lease contract on the apartment of this case was terminated at the latest on October 20, 2019, and thus, the defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit to the plaintiff KRW 100 million due to the termination of the above lease contract.

Therefore, the defendant asserts that it is unfair to claim termination of the contract while demanding reduction of the lease deposit, even though the interest on the secured loan to E corporation, the mortgagee of the right to collateral security regarding the apartment of this case, was paid all up to August 2020 upon the plaintiff's request. However, the above reasons asserted by the defendant cannot affect the claim for restitution due to termination due to the expiration of the term of the lease.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.