1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 2,00,000 as well as to the plaintiff on January 24, 2019.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 1, 2009, the Plaintiff leased a lease deposit of 20 million won, monthly rent of 200,000 won, and from September 1, 2009 to 24 months from September 1, 2009 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and paid the full amount of the lease deposit to the Defendant.

B. While the Plaintiff had renewed the instant lease agreement with the Defendant on October 2018, the Plaintiff was unable to operate in the future due to redevelopment of the single unit of the instant store, and the Plaintiff delivered the instant store to the Defendant on November 24, 2018.

C. On November 26, 2018, the Plaintiff received KRW 26,400,000 from the redevelopment partnership with the consent of the Defendant, a lessor.

On December 23, 2018, the Defendant returned 18,000,000 won out of 20,000,000 of the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiff, and did not refund the remainder of 2,00,000 won.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purpose of whole pleadings

2. In full view of the facts and circumstances revealed in the above fact-finding, namely, the fact that the price of the instant store was scheduled to be redeveloped, the Defendant, a lessor, was naturally aware of this fact, and the Defendant agreed to receive the Plaintiff’s business compensation and refused to receive the instant store from the Plaintiff, it is reasonable to deem that the instant lease agreement was terminated by the agreement of the parties around November 24, 2018, when the Defendant delivered the instant store to the Plaintiff.

(A) The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff should deduct the monthly rent for the remainder of the lease term, but the above argument against the above judgment is not accepted). Therefore, the Defendant’s restitution following the termination of the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiff as the restoration to its original state, and the Plaintiff’s remaining lease deposit amount to the Plaintiff.