1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. According to the plaintiff's expansion of the purport of the claim in the trial, the defendant 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around August 2015, the representative D of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant brokerage corporation”) introduced the Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu F Building G (hereinafter “instant officetel”) that the Plaintiff, a Chinese student of UBS who wishes to rent an officetel, is managed by E (hereinafter “the instant lessor”).

B. On August 11, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with respect to the instant lessor and the instant officetel as the deposit amount of KRW 20,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 280,000, and the lease term of KRW 280,000 from August 11, 2015 to August 11, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the terms of a special agreement, which provides that “The deposit shall be deposited into the account of the instant intermediary corporation, and the instant lease agreement shall be concluded under the responsibility of the instant intermediary corporation, and the monthly rent shall be deposited into the instant lessor’s account.”

On the same day, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 20,000,000 to the account of the instant intermediary corporation.

C. However, between I and I on March 24, 2014, H, the owner of the instant officetel, entered into a lease agreement with the terms of KRW 3,00,000, KRW 370,00 per month of rent, and KRW 370,00 per month of rent, and the term of lease from March 7, 2014 to March 6, 2015, and there is no need to delegate the management right or the right of lease to the instant lessor with respect to the instant officetel.

On the other hand, it did not verify whether D delegated the sub-lease or management of the instant officetel to H at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement.

H brought an issue with the knowledge that the Plaintiff was residing in the instant officetel as he/she was aware of, and eventually, the Plaintiff entered into a new lease agreement with H on February 28, 2017 with the purport that the Plaintiff succeeds to the former lessee’s lease agreement.

The plaintiff of Egyle shall be unpaid and unpaid from I as of the date of transfer from among the 3,000,000 won of lease deposit.