1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 40 million.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3.Paragraph 1.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 7, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) by setting a special agreement as follows: (a) the deposit amount of KRW 40 million and the lease period from December 15, 2012 to December 14, 2014; and (b) the lease agreement was concluded by setting the following special agreement:

(hereinafter referred to as “the lease of this case”). (1) The transfer shall be made in the present condition.

(2) The lessee shall be left and left at the time of directors before the contract period expires.

(3) This contract is a contract under which the existing right to collateral security is cancelled.

On December 7, 2012, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the remainder of KRW 4 million and KRW 36 million on December 14, 2012.

C. At the time of the instant lease agreement, the instant real estate was registered with the Daegu District Court (Seoul District Court No. 25000, Apr. 30, 2010) and the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage establishment by the debtor, the debtor, and the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation, which was concluded on Dec. 17, 2012.

On August 30, 2013, the Defendant completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the maximum debt amount of KRW 130,000,000,000, as the Daegu District Court No. 65354, which was received on August 30, 2013, against DNA Capital Co., Ltd.

E. On February 10, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the instant lease agreement, which was terminated on December 14, 2014, and notified the Defendant of the return of the deposit by February 16, 2015, and the said notification reached the Defendant on February 11, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that: (a) from October 2014 to February 2015, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to refuse the renewal of the lease of this case several times to the Defendant and requested the return of the deposit; and (b) the Plaintiff agreed on February 2015.

However, as the Defendant did not return the deposit, the lease contract was terminated by document proving the contents of the contract on February 10, 2015, and the Defendant notified the return of the deposit.