Whether the lessee may claim to deduct the amount in arrears from the security deposit, in case where the security deposit is transferred under the lease contract to which the security deposit was received, the amount in arrears shall be deducted from the security deposit until the property is returned due to the termination of the lease contract (affirmative)

The security deposit received from the lease of real estate guarantees all the obligations of the lessee due to the lease, such as the rent and the liability for damages arising from the destruction, damage, etc. of the object, and the amount equivalent to the secured obligation is naturally deducted from the security deposit without any separate declaration of intention, barring any special circumstances, when the object is returned after the termination of the lease relationship. Therefore, even if the security deposit is transferred from the lease contract to which the security deposit was received, the lessee may claim to deduct the amount equivalent to the rent in arrears from the security deposit until the object is returned upon the termination

Article 618 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff (Attorney Kim Sang-hoon, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant (Law Firm Future, Attorneys Lee Jae-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Busan High Court (Capwon) Decision 2012Na3435 decided September 13, 2013

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The security deposit received from the lease of real estate guarantees all the obligations of the lessee arising from the lease, such as the lease obligation, the obligation to compensate for damages arising from the destruction, damage, etc. of the object, and the amount equivalent to the secured obligation is naturally deducted from the security deposit without any separate declaration of intention (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da50729 delivered on December 7, 199), barring any special circumstance, when the object is returned after the termination of the lease relationship. Thus, even if the security deposit is transferred from the lease contract to which the security deposit is received, the lessee may claim to deduct the amount equivalent to the overdue rent from the security deposit until the object is returned upon the termination of the lease contract.

As to the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant for the rent of KRW 15 billion, which was overduely paid against the Nonparty, the lessor of the instant store, and the non-party, the non-party, the non-party, and non-ND, the lessee, the non-party, and the non-party seeking reimbursement of KRW 15 billion, which was overdue, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court accepted the Defendant’s claim for deduction on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, and determined that KRW 150 million, out of the overdue rent of KRW 1.5 million,

According to the above legal principles, the above determination by the court below is just, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the consent and the legal nature of the lease deposit without reservation of objection in the interpretation and assignment of claims, or in violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Sang-hoon (Presiding Justice)