1. The Defendant’s KRW 200,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from November 16, 2019 to April 23, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 29, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the Jung-gu Incheon metropolitan apartment D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from the Defendant with the lease deposit amount of KRW 200 million, the lease deposit period from July 17, 2017 to July 16, 2019.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant lease agreement”). (b)

The Plaintiff paid the lease deposit to the Defendant at that time, and completed the move-in report after receiving the instant apartment.

C. The Plaintiff knew that he/she did not wish to renew the instant lease contract to the Defendant three to four months prior to the expiration of the lease term.

On June 17, 2019, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) left the apartment of this case with a part of the slaughter left. On August 27, 2019, the Plaintiff was subject to the order of lease registration as to the apartment of this case by the Incheon District Court 2019Kadan100476, and completed the registration of the housing lease around that time.

At present, the apartment house in this case remains in a situation where the plaintiff's house is not remaining.

E. On November 15, 2019, the Plaintiff informed the Defendant of the present door password of the apartment of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, since the lease contract of this case was terminated at the expiration of the term, the defendant is obligated to refund the deposit amount of KRW 200 million to the plaintiff.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff sought damages for delay from July 23, 2019, the following day after the house was completely taken out from the apartment of this case.

At present, the fact that the plaintiff's slaughter did not remain in the apartment of this case is as seen earlier, but there is no evidence to confirm when the plaintiff carried out the slaughter.

In addition, the plaintiff argues that "the contact number of the real estate brokerage office that intends to open the house was notified so that the inside of the house can be confirmed whenever the contact is made," and even according to the plaintiff's assertion, the defendant is notified of the password directly to the defendant before November 15, 2019.