임대차보증금반환
1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. In the first instance court’s judgment, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the principal lawsuit claiming the return of the deposit for lease in the first instance court. The Defendant filed a counterclaim claiming the unpaid electric charge, ② unjust enrichment from possession and use of real estate, ③ toilet restoration expenses, ④ supplementary expenses for the regulation of the Gu office. The court of first instance accepted only the claim for the unpaid electric charge payment, ② the claim for unjust enrichment from possession and use of real estate, ② the part of the claim for the principal lawsuit and the remainder of the counterclaim, respectively, and only the Plaintiff filed an appeal.
Therefore, among the principal claim and counterclaim claim, ① unpaid electric charges are claimed in lieu of the principal claim, ② only the portion of the claim for unjust enrichment due to possession and use of real estate is subject to the judgment of this court, and it is to be judged on this issue.
2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On April 7, 2015, the Plaintiff lent the name of his/her own believers C to the Defendant and Busan Jin-gu D and 1st floor (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
The plaintiff asserts that the lease deposit amount of KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 500,000 (the plaintiff was changed to KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 700,000,000 after the lease deposit due to the problem of the repair cost of the real estate in this case).
(2) From April 7, 2015 to April 6, 2018, a lease agreement was concluded between April 7, 2015 and April 6, 2018, and the Defendant paid KRW 10 million out of the lease deposit on the date of the contract. The Plaintiff was notified of the termination of the said lease agreement on or around December 2015 due to the Defendant’s nonperformance of the obligation to allow the Plaintiff to use and profit from the instant real estate. Therefore, the Defendant shall return the lease deposit KRW 135,730,000, which deducted the unpaid electricity payment of KRW 135,730,000 from the unpaid electricity payment, and KRW 6,364,270 from the unpaid monthly rent. (2) As the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with C, other than the Plaintiff, on April 7, 2015, the Plaintiff’s claim based on the premise that the instant real estate lessee is the Plaintiff.