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.

1. Facts without dispute;

A. On June 28, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the first floor (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of the Plaintiff’s annual building C in Busan-gu, Busan-do (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with a deposit of KRW 30 million and monthly rent of KRW 1.8 million (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. At the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant under the pretext of the facility cost for one air conditioner and one air conditioner installed in the instant real estate at the time of entering into the instant lease agreement.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant transferred the instant real estate to a third party before the expiration of the instant lease agreement.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff could not pay excessive rent due to the business depression, and thus intends to terminate the lease contract of this case, the defendant is obligated to return the amount of KRW 10 million paid by the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant paid KRW 6 million to the previous lessee on condition that he acquires all the facilities, such as air conditioners, and air conditioners, and that he received KRW 10 million by adding the expenses to KRW 6 million paid to the previous lessee upon entering into the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff, and thus, is not obligated to return the said agreement.

C. According to the foregoing, it is reasonable to view that a person who runs a business in a commercial building, the object of the lease, or a person who intends to run a business, as a price for the transfer or use of tangible and intangible property value, such as business facilities, fixtures, customers, credit, business know-how, and business gains depending on the location of the commercial building, as a price for the transfer or use of the tangible and intangible property value, such as deposit and rent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da115120, May 9, 2013). According to the foregoing, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant as facility cost when concluding the instant lease contract as a premium.

The premium shall be from the lessee to the lessor.