건물명도
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is simultaneously paid KRW 20 million by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the instant real estate on May 20, 2015, setting the lease agreement as the lease deposit amount of KRW 30 million, KRW 2 million per month, and the lease period of KRW 10 million until May 19, 2017 (2) (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
Accordingly, the Defendant paid KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff, and around that time, received and used the instant real estate.
On the other hand, part of the instant real estate was used by D, which is the will of the defendant's reference C, but there was a dispute between the defendant and D around October 2015.
The Plaintiff, Defendant, and D concluded the instant lease agreement, and instead, they concluded the lease agreement by paying the lease deposit to the Plaintiff.
Accordingly, on November 2015, D paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant, out of the lease deposit to be paid to the Plaintiff under the consent of the Plaintiff’s side, and around that time, the Defendant collected most of the house in the instant real estate.
D As above, the instant real estate was independently used from the time when the Defendant collected the house, etc. from the instant real estate.
However, on the ground that the Defendant failed to refund the remainder of the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million from Plaintiff or D, the Defendant prevented another person from entering the entrance of the instant real estate, such as D, by locking the entrance door of the instant real estate at the end of December or around January 2016, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the instant lease contract was terminated due to the Defendant’s delinquency in rent.
The plaintiff asserted that the defendant did not use the real estate of this case since D paid 10 million won as part of the lease deposit to the defendant instead of the plaintiff on November 2015, 2015, and that the plaintiff did not pay from November 2015 from the complaint of this case.