1. The defendant shall pay 154,000,000 won to the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Indication of claim;

A. On January 10, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to rent KRW 140 million for deposit KRW 401,000,000,000 for the period from February 15, 2014 to February 14, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease”). The Plaintiff and the Defendant set the down payment of KRW 14 million for the Plaintiff or the Defendant’s nonperformance damages.

B. The Plaintiff paid a full deposit to the Defendant, and resided in the leased object of this case from February 15, 2014.

C. However, at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant agreed to repay KRW 200 million out of the loans (the maximum amount of claims KRW 526 million) to the ASEAN Credit Union, a mortgagee of the right to collateral security regarding the said building, until April 2014. The Plaintiff revoked the instant lease agreement on the ground of the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return to the plaintiff the deposit amounting to KRW 140 million with the restoration of the original state, and the defendant is obligated to pay the compensation amounting to KRW 14 million with the compensation for damages.

2. Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act applicable provisions of Acts.

3. Some of the grounds for dismissal are for the Plaintiff to pay the instant lease deposit and damages for delay. However, the Defendant’s duty to restore the lease deposit and the Plaintiff’s duty to compensate for damages and the Plaintiff’s duty to restore the leased object (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da25138, 25145, Jul. 26, 1996), and the Plaintiff performed its duty to restore the leased object.

Since there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff continued to provide performance, the plaintiff's claim for this part is without merit.