건물명도 등
1. The plaintiff
A. Defendant B indicated in the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9, among the ground floors of the building listed in the separate sheet.
1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the contents of evidence Nos. 1-3 and the purport of the entire pleadings.
On February 24, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the instant store to Defendant B with the deposit of KRW 3,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 700,000, and the period from February 24, 2017 to February 23, 2019.
Defendant B had been supplied alcoholic beverages by Defendant Limited Company C (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) while running the instant danran bar at the instant store. The Defendant Company provided Defendant Company’s property, such as alcohol storage, cooling, and ice rink for the said danran bar’s business, and the said things are currently located in the instant store.
As Defendant B did not pay the rent after April 2017, the Plaintiff terminated the lease agreement on December 3, 2018 with the overdue charge of at least three (3) years by content-certified mail to Defendant B.
“Notice” has been served to the Defendant at that time.
2. According to the above facts of claim against Defendant B, the lease contract between the Plaintiff and Defendant B was terminated upon the arrival of the above content-certified mail.
Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff, and pay 14,000,000 won in arrears from April 1, 2017 to November 2018 (i.e., 700,000 won x 20 months) and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from February 17, 2019 to the date of complete payment, and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 70,000 won per month from December 1, 2018 to the date of completion of delivery of the instant store.
3. The Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant Company against the Defendant Company, while holding the instant store in the same line with the Defendant Company B while running a singran business, sought the delivery of the instant store against the Defendant Company.
However, with the above evidence alone, the defendant company run the danran business in the store of this case with the defendant B.