1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 21, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant with the content that the lease deposit amount is KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.5 million, and the lease term is from April 20, 2014 to April 19, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

After that, the monthly rent stipulated in the instant lease agreement has increased to KRW 1.7 million.

B. On the other hand, on April 19, 2019, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a new lease agreement (hereinafter “instant new lease agreement”) with the effect that the instant real estate is KRW 40 million, monthly rent of KRW 2.2 million, and the lease term until April 19, 2022 (hereinafter “instant new lease agreement”).

On April 20, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant the increased lease deposit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The lease deposit and monthly increase agreement made at the time of the conclusion of the instant new lease agreement is null and void within the extent exceeding the increase ratio pursuant to Article 11(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act. 2) Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to reduce the lease deposit set forth in the instant new lease agreement to the Plaintiff as KRW 31.5 million [3 million x 0.05], and monthly rent to KRW 1,785,000 ( KRW 1,700,000 x 0.05 05 x 0.05 ). The Defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit paid to the Plaintiff in excess of the scope of 8.5 million ( KRW 10 million - 1.5 million - 1.5 million).

B. In light of the legislative purpose of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the structure and purport of the provision on the right to demand an increase or decrease in rent, etc., the agreement on rent to be paid in excess of the increase ratio under Article 11(1) of the said Act is null and void within the scope exceeding the increase ratio, and the lessee is the excess rent paid.