1. The defendant shall pay 90,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 12% per annum from September 5, 2019 to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 11, 2016, the Plaintiff leased E (hereinafter referred to as “E”) out of the real estate (referring to a multi-household house; hereinafter the same shall apply) listed in the attached Table, which was owned by D, as the lease deposit amount of KRW 90,00,000, and the period from March 17, 2016 to March 16, 2018, and completed the move-in report on the same day after obtaining the fixed date on March 16, 2016 and completed the move-in report on the resident registration on the same day.

B. As to the instant real estate, on July 7, 2017, the transfer registration for ownership was made on May 19, 2017, on the grounds of sale on May 19, 2017, the transfer registration for ownership was made on September 5, 2017 in G Co., Ltd. on September 5, 2017, and the transfer registration for ownership was made on February 22, 2018 thereafter on February 22, 2018.

C. After that, on November 2, 2018, on the instant real estate, the registration of ownership transfer was made on October 30, 2018 in the Defendant’s future.

On May 9, 2019, the Plaintiff issued the order of lease registration with the Cheongju District Court 2019Kaman84, and completed the registration of the lease deposit amounting to KRW 90,000,000 on June 4, 2019 on the instant real estate within the scope of subparagraph E of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Gap evidence 4-1, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the defendant succeeded to the status as a lessor against the plaintiff in accordance with the Housing Lease Protection Act.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to return KRW 90,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion is merely recorded in his name as the owner, and the former owner of F or H, the purchaser of the real estate of this case, is the actual owner, and thus he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim. However, it is insufficient to recognize the facts of the defendant's assertion only by the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1 through 4.