1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 15, 2008, Nonparty C resided in the move-in report in Leecheon-si D-401 (hereinafter “instant housing”) and died on May 9, 2009.

B. The Plaintiff is the mother of the deceased C, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 1, 2005 with respect to the instant housing, and Nonparty E, the Defendant’s mother, managed the instant housing.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim asserts that C is liable to pay the Plaintiff, who is the deceased’s heir, the amount of KRW 4,000,000 for the lease deposit, KRW 260,000 per month, and the amount of KRW 4,00,000 for the lease deposit, around the end of 207. The Plaintiff paid KRW 4,00,000 for the lease deposit to the Defendant. On May 2009, after C died, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the said lease at around that time. As such, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff, who is the deceased’s heir, the amount of KRW 4,00,00 for the lease deposit and the amount of arrears

However, it is difficult to believe that Gap evidence No. 4-1, which seems consistent with the plaintiff's above assertion, was stated in Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 6, and it is insufficient to recognize that Eul paid 4,000,000 won to the defendant only by the descriptions of evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 6.

Rather, according to the statement in Eul evidence No. 2, C remitted monthly rent of KRW 250,00 and management expenses to the Defendant’s account, which is the Defendant’s mother, monthly, KRW 16,000, and KRW 266,000 during the lease term. However, there is no data on the details of remitting the amount equivalent to KRW 4,00,000 for the lease deposit to the Defendant or E. In addition, E does not have any data on the details of remitting the amount equivalent to KRW 4,00,000 for the lease deposit. At the end of 2007, E was able to live in the house of this case only when C was able to live in the house of this case at the end of the end of 207, and only was able to look at only monthly and management expenses, and otherwise it is recognized that C paid the Defendant the lease deposit of KRW 4,00,000.