1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On September 2014, C, who is the Plaintiff, entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the lease of D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with a deposit of KRW 50,000,00, monthly rent of KRW 1,550,000.

On August 13, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the instant apartment from October 18, 2014 to October 17, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

In the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are re-contracts according to the individual circumstances of the former lessee C, and will succeed to the rights and obligations of the former lessee, such as lease period, deposit, monthly rent, etc.

1. The term “assumed” was determined.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the instant lease contract was terminated, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 50,000,000,000.

B. On December 2015, the Plaintiff prepared a receipt (B 3) stating that “The full amount of the deposit under the instant lease agreement was received” to F, who arranged the instant lease agreement to a police officer at the Seocho on the ground of the Defendant’s assertion of repayment.

On December 13, 2015, the Defendant returned KRW 5,000,000 to the Plaintiff out of the lease deposit.

On February 26, 2016, the Defendant paid F the remainder of the deposit amount of KRW 45,000,000 to F, and received the said receipt.

[Ground for recognition] A without dispute, Gap 1, Eul 3, Eul 4, 5, and the purport of the entire pleadings 2) are effective even in cases where the person holding the receipt does not have the right to receive reimbursement (Article 471 of the Civil Act). The defendant paid the F, a receipt holder, the amount of KRW 45,00,000 in the remainder of the lease deposit, thereby returning the entire deposit under the instant lease agreement.

The defendant's assertion of repayment is justified.

3. Conclusion.