임차권확인
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) and the preliminary claims added by this court are dismissed.
2. Appeal;
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except where the plaintiff added the following judgments with respect to the conjunctive claims added by this court, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
2. Judgment on the conjunctive claim
A. During the period from December 2015 to January 2016, the Plaintiff, the cause of the instant claim, according to an agreement with C, the lessor, at the time, performed the construction of the 170,600,000 underground entrance of the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant construction”) and increased the objective value of the instant real estate by 73,456,00 won. Therefore, the Defendant, who succeeded to the lessor status of C, is obligated to pay the said money in return for beneficial expenses to the Plaintiff.
B. Determination 1) Article 626 of the Civil Act on the right to claim reimbursement of expenses is not a mandatory provision in a lease agreement to waive the right to claim reimbursement of expenses, and the lessee may waive it by agreement between the parties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da33886, Nov. 10, 2005; Supreme Court Decision 2005Da333893, Nov. 26, 2015). The Plaintiff’s assertion to the effect that the lease agreement of the term of lease (Counterclaim, etc.) of the construction of the construction of the instant case is a special agreement and “5....... is completed, in principle, restitution in the form of completion, and the level of restitution shall be determined by agreement between the parties, taking into account the status of the successor’s occupancy, the plan of the lessor, etc.