1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 28, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant leased the lease deposit amounting to KRW 65 million, and from October 8, 2014 to October 8, 2016, with respect to the 105-dong 402 apartment owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Plaintiff paid to the Defendant a deposit of KRW 65 million under the instant lease agreement, and received the instant apartment from the Defendant.

C. Since November 8, 2014, the Plaintiff acquired the instant apartment, Fungi generated on the wall of the instant apartment. D.

On November 18, 2014, the Plaintiff leased F apartment 302 Dong 1510, 150,000,000 won as the deposit for lease from Chungcheongnam-nam Budget-gun.

E. On February 2, 2015, the Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 3,910,00 due to mycoung et al. of the instant apartment, and sent a notice to the Defendant to refund the lease deposit and compensate the said damages until February 16, 2015. The Defendant received the said notice around that time.

F. On December 28, 2015, the Plaintiff delivered the instant apartment to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 7 through 9 (including branch numbers), Gap evidence 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a result of the appraisal conducted by the first instance court appraiser D,

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The instant apartment building, the cause of the claim following the termination of the agreement around November 2014, was in a state in which it was impossible to live a normal life due to the long-term leakage or fung and malodor, etc. due to the nature of the cause of the claim. As such, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement around November 2014, the instant lease agreement was terminated by agreement.

Therefore, the defendant is due to the defect of the apartment of this case, which is 65 million won or more, to the plaintiff.