1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual interest thereon from August 10, 2018 to September 19, 2018, and the following.

1. The fact that the Plaintiff: (a) on April 27, 2016, leased (hereinafter referred to as “the lease in this case”) a lease deposit of KRW 40,00,000 from the Defendant on the ground of the building Leecheon-si D; (b) from June 4, 2016 to June 4, 2018; and (c) the Plaintiff’s delivery of the leased object to the Defendant on August 9, 2018, when the lease in this case expires due to the expiration of the term of the lease in this case, may be recognized by taking into account the absence of dispute between the parties, or the entire purport of each entry in subparagraphs A through 4 and all pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the above recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant should pay the lease deposit and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. 1) The defendant's assertion that the obligation to return the deposit did not exist is indicated as the condition that the lessee should be deducted after the termination of the lease contract of this case. This is alleged that the lease deposit was agreed to be paid by the lessee who entered into a new lease contract with the lessor. Thus, according to the evidence No. 1, it can be acknowledged that the contents of the lease contract of this case are the same as the defendant's assertion. However, it is insufficient to recognize that the above facts and the evidence submitted are insufficient to prove that the defendant did not have the obligation to return the lease deposit, and the above assertion is without merit. 2) The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff damaged the boiler among the lease facilities of this case, and therefore, the plaintiff should deduct 500,000 won from the lease deposit of this case. Thus, considering the whole purport of argument No. 1, it can be acknowledged that the defendant paid 500,000 won at the boiler repair expense of this case. However, the evidence that the plaintiff destroyed the boiler.