손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. Basic facts
A. On November 1, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant and Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, setting the lease term from November 1, 201 to October 31, 201 with respect to the building on the first floor (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on which the lease deposit is KRW 100 million, and monthly rent is KRW 8.5 million (excluding value-added tax).
B. After that, on September 30, 201, the Plaintiff amended the said lease agreement by setting the lease term from November 1, 2011 to October 31, 201, as the lease deposit amount of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 14 million (excluding value-added tax) as the lease lease term of the Defendant and the instant real estate.
(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul’s evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. While the Plaintiff’s assertion was leased and used by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to change the lessee when the Plaintiff seeks a new lessee to lease the instant real estate under the same conditions as the instant lease agreement.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff sought a new lessee the (main) Coco Trust and the (main) L&C, and the said new lessee agreed to lease the instant real estate under the same conditions as the instant lease agreement.
Accordingly, although the Plaintiff removed the Plaintiff’s facilities installed in the instant real estate, the said new lessee, as the Defendant’s rejection, and the (State) L&C did not enter into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the instant real estate.
Ultimately, the Plaintiff, by removing facilities installed in the instant real estate under an agreement with the Defendant, failed to use the instant real estate entirely for six months from May 1, 2012 to October 31, 2012. Accordingly, the Defendant calculated the sum of monthly rent for the six-month period, which is deducted from the lease deposit.