1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant leased, from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, Suwon-si, Kuwon-si C apartment and D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. On June 1, 2014, the Defendant entered into a sublease contract with the Plaintiff to sublease the instant apartment from June 16, 2014 to June 15, 2016 (hereinafter “instant contract”). On June 16, 2014, the Plaintiff, a lessee, paid KRW 90 million to the Defendant, a sub-lease, who is the sub-lease, to sublease the instant apartment.

C. In the fact-finding survey of the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, the Plaintiff was found to have resided in the apartment of this case without the lessor’s consent to sublease. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on the instant contract, and the Plaintiff transferred the instant apartment to the Defendant around February 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 90 million for sublease deposit and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 1, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

After the termination of the contract of this case, the Defendant asserted that the return of the sub-lease deposit by the Defendant under the contract of this case was extinguished, since the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to accept the sub-lease deposit with the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the E in sequential order, and thus, the obligation to return the sub-lease deposit was extinguished.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was an agreement on the assumption of the obligation asserted by the defendant, and the defendant's assertion is not acceptable.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable.