1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim as to the above cancellation part is dismissed.

1. Assertion and determination

A. In addition to the overall purport of arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including paper numbers), the defendant leased the housing of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Branch Office (hereinafter "the instant housing") from around 2008 to D from Oct. 15, 201, and again leased the housing of this case by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 5,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,000, and the period of October 15, 2013. After the expiration of the above period, the plaintiff continued to use the housing of this case after the expiration of the above period, and on Oct. 15, 2015, the defendant requested the defendant to issue a collection order of KRW 10,000,000, KRW 200,000, KRW 200,0000, KRW 16,000,000,000.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant terminated the lease contract of this case to D by way of content-certified mail as of September 9, 2016, and barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 5,000,000 to the Plaintiff, who is the person entitled to collect the right to claim the return of the lease deposit under the above lease contract.

The Plaintiff also claimed damages for delay from December 23, 2015 for the claim to refund the deposit. However, since the above lease contract was terminated on or around September 9, 2016, the deposit is made from December 23, 2015.