The defendant paid KRW 28,307,100 to the plaintiff and 5% per annum from November 14, 2019 to November 25, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 26, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the instant building site and ground (hereinafter “instant building”) in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, which is jointly owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”).

Deposit KRW 80 million, monthly rent of KRW 2.3 million (payment in advance on June 16, 201, KRW 2.5 million from June 16, 2014 to June 15, 2019 (60 months) lease term of KRW 2.5 million from June 16, 2014

B. After concluding the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff operated the instant commercial building with the trade name “E”.

C. The Plaintiff arranged for a new lessee F before the termination of the instant lease agreement to the Defendant, and the Defendant demanded that the Plaintiff be a high-amount car and thereby obstructed the Plaintiff’s recovery of the premium, thereby filing a lawsuit against the Defendant for damages claim with this court No. 2019Da113243, but the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on February 12, 2020.

On September 30, 2019, the Plaintiff terminated the marina business, and around October 15, 2019, removed all the facilities, such as the cooling and display stand, installed in the instant commercial building, and sent text messages to the effect that “the facilities were removed and the key is in custody,” and demanded the return of deposit KRW 80 million.

On the other hand, on September 21, 2019, the Plaintiff paid 2750,000 won a monthly rent (2.5 million won + value-added tax 2.50,000 won) to the Defendant on September 21, 2019 (from September 16, 2019 to October 15, 2019) (i.e., monthly rent of 2.5 million won). On October 4, 2019, the Plaintiff found the Korea Electric Power Corporation and then returned 721,030 won to the Defendant after confirming the electric charges of the instant commercial building up to the time, and (ii) paid 11,920 won a water supply fee of the instant commercial building up to September 3, 2019 (from September 3, 2019 to October 2, 2019).

E. However, the Defendant rejected the return of the deposit on the ground that the commercial building of this case was not restored to its original state.

F. On November 5, 2019, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit.