1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the owner of the EMoel, a building with land C and D (hereinafter “instant Moel”).

B. The Plaintiff was living together with F around 191 at the first time with F and the Plaintiff from September 201 to September 201.

C. On May 4, 2005, the Plaintiff leased and operated the instant Moel from the Defendant. The Plaintiff left the instant Moel around September 2012, and the F was in possession of the instant Moel up to the present day.

On November 19, 2012, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that the lease contract is terminated, and the above certificate of content reaches the Defendant on November 20, 2012.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 19, 41 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 3, witness F's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) around May 2005, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant by setting the lease deposit of KRW 50 million per month, and KRW 7 million per month, without setting the lease term with respect to the instant her mother, and subsequently, concluded a lease agreement to operate the instant her mother in around 2007 and set the lease deposit of KRW 150 million per month, and KRW 6 million per month when renewal of the lease agreement around 2007. (2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant, upon renewal of the lease agreement around May 2008, set the lease deposit of KRW 250 million and KRW 50 million per month (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the said lease deposit of KRW 250 million to the Defendant.

3) The instant lease agreement was terminated at the lapse of one month from the date on which the certificate of the effect that the instant lease agreement will be terminated was delivered to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 250 million to the Plaintiff the lease deposit of the instant lease agreement. (B) First, as otherwise alleged by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is solely and solely under the lease agreement with the Defendant.