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. The reasoning of this court’s explanation concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance is stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) the same shall apply in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In addition, the part 2 of the lease contract of this case was concluded even when the real estate in this case was extremely underdeveloped and dangerous, and the defendant asserts to the effect that he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until he is paid damages, such as the lease deposit of this case, the cost of repairing electricity incurred by the defendant due to water leakage, the cost of repairing electricity of 320,000 won, and the electricity fee of 1.2 million won incurred by the defendant due to water leakage. First, as to the argument that he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim for rent on the ground of the existence of the lease deposit, the lease deposit is secured by the rent arising from the time when the lease contract is terminated until the time when the lessee delivers the object, and the secured debt amount is naturally deducted from the lease deposit without a separate declaration (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da83230, Sept. 28, 2005), barring any special circumstance, the defendant cannot reject the plaintiff's claim for rent of this case on the ground that the lease deposit of this case was not returned (see Supreme Court Decision 2987Da9794.

This part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

The defendant's external assertion is known in light of the evidence incurred in the above basic facts.