1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. In light of the fact that there is no dispute over the Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of the claim, and comprehensively taking account of the entries in Gap’s evidence No. 1 (Evidence No. 1) and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff transferred the deposit amount of part of the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B Parking Lot (hereinafter “instant land”) from the Defendant on December 30, 201, with a fixed period of KRW 5,00,000 per month, and KRW 1,50,000 per month, and one year for tea (hereinafter “instant contract”), and the said contract has been renewed several times. Since the Plaintiff used the instant land to carry out a garbage treatment agency business, he leased another land to the Defendant into the place of business, and thus, on June 30, 2016, he/she expressed his/her intention to move from the instant land and requested the return of the deposit by June 30, 2016, the Defendant did not raise any objection against the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to move his/her workplace.

According to the above facts, the contract in this case was terminated upon the termination of the agreement on June 30, 2016, and thus, the defendant is obligated to refund the deposit amount of KRW 5,000,000 to the plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The purport of the assertion was that the Plaintiff delivered the instant land on August 31, 2016, and did not pay management expenses from September 2015 to August 2016, 2016, and thus, the amount of KRW 3,000,000 equivalent to the rent for the month from August 7, 2016 and KRW 1,560,000 (monthly 130,000 x 12 months) should be deducted.

B. (1) Determination is based on the relationship between the lessee’s duty to return the leased object and the lessor’s duty to return the remainder after deducting the lessee’s default due to the termination of the lease agreement. Therefore, if the lessee continuously occupied the leased building by exercising his/her right to defense of simultaneous performance even after the termination of the lease agreement, the lessor is obliged to return the deposit to the lessee.