1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 229,00,000.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit.

1. According to the purport of Gap’s evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff’s lease on April 19, 2012 part of the second underground floor of the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Building for two years and paid lease deposit KRW 250 million from the Defendant.

The term “the above lease” expired on April 19, 2014, and the Plaintiff thereafter is the person who received the return of KRW 21 million out of the lease deposit from the Defendant. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the lease deposit to the Plaintiff KRW 229 million ( KRW 250 million - 21 million).

In addition, the Plaintiff also sought payment for delay from the day following the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case on the remaining lease deposit, but the lessee’s obligation to return the leased object arising from the termination of the lease agreement and the lessor’s obligation to return the remaining deposit after deducting the lessee’s default from the lessor’s obligation to return the leased object. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da14664, Jul. 25, 1995). Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay damages for delay due to delay of the obligation to return the lease deposit only

However, there is no assertion or proof about the fact that the plaintiff delivered it to the defendant, and there is no reason for the plaintiff's claim for damages for delay.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remainder is dismissed as there is no ground.