1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Facts of recognition

On October 5, 2010, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu D Apartment 801 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with the term of lease from November 19, 2010 to November 19, 2012, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 220,00,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C paid a security deposit for lease stipulated in the instant lease agreement to the Defendant, and was transferred the apartment of this case and resided with the Plaintiff.

[Grounds for recognition] The Defendant asserted that there was no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, and the Plaintiff’s ground for claim as to the whole purport of the pleadings, agreed to terminate the lease contract of this case with the Plaintiff, and agreed to return the lease deposit by September 24, 2012.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not refund the lease deposit on September 24, 2012, which was the agreed date, and accordingly, the Plaintiff was unable to pay the lease deposit at the location of the director, thereby resulting in loss of 10,000,000 won as the down payment was confiscated.

In a case where the Defendant did not refund the lease deposit to the Plaintiff on the agreed date, he was well aware of the circumstances that the Plaintiff would confiscate the down payment of KRW 10,000,000,000 in the place where the Plaintiff would have directors, and thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff damages of KRW 10,000,000 due to the said nonperformance of obligation and damages for delay.

Judgment

No evidence exists to acknowledge that the Defendant agreed to return the instant lease deposit amount of KRW 220 million to the Plaintiff by September 24, 2012.

Even if the existence of an agreement as alleged by the Plaintiff is acknowledged, according to the evidence No. 3, the Plaintiff may be recognized as having agreed on October 8, 2012 that KRW 10 million, which was confiscated by receiving KRW 220 million from the Defendant, while receiving the lease deposit of this case from the Defendant on October 8, 2012.