1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. At the same time, the delivery of real estate stated in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff is KRW 40 million.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 9, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit for lease (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with respect to the real estate indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the term from September 5, 2010 to September 5, 2012 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The instant lease agreement was explicitly renewed. On March 26, 2018, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant proof that “The instant lease agreement is terminated because it is substantially impossible to reside due to the aging of waterworks and electricity, etc.”

C. On February 2, 2018, a boiler, which was in the instant real estate, was not operated with the stoves, and the Plaintiff replaced the boiler at the expense of KRW 800,000 on February 4, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 4-1, and 4-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. There is no dispute between the parties that the instant lease agreement, which was implicitly renewed, was terminated by the Plaintiff’s termination notice as to the cause of the claim, and the fact that the boiler with the instant real estate subject to the Defendant’s repair obligation, was replaced by the Plaintiff’s 800,000 won as the boiler was cut off and replaced by the Plaintiff’s 80,000 won. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit amounting to KRW 40 million and KRW 80,000,000,000 for boiler replacement costs

B. As to the Defendant’s defense, the Defendant asserted that the amount of damages should be deducted from the lease deposit, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s negligence on the part of failing to take preventive measures against the dynamics against the water pipe and boiler, caused damage to the water pipe and boiler’s ceiling of the first floor of the instant real estate, and caused damage equivalent to approximately KRW 15,004,00 with the repair cost, such as flooding the underground room, etc., but the testimony by the Defendant or the witness C alone caused the Plaintiff’s negligence.