원상복구비
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff (appointed party) and the designated parties are dismissed;
2. The appeal costs.
1. On December 31, 2009, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiffs”) entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B on the lease of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Building 201 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant store”) to Defendant B. Defendant B operated the instant dental hospital with the trade name “H” at the instant store.
After that, on December 31, 2012, Defendant C, the female students of Defendant B, changed the part of the lease deposit and the difference with the Plaintiffs to enter into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) again (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). On December 10, 2012, Defendant C received the protocol prior to the filing of a lawsuit as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012No. 19555). The instant store was used as dental hospital as the previous dental hospital, and was delivered to the Plaintiffs on April 30, 2014, when the lease term expires.
At the time of the termination of the instant lease lease agreement, the lease deposit was KRW 35 million, and up to that time, KRW 29,59,840,000,000,000,000 for overdue rent of KRW 92,910,00 for unpaid electricity and sewage, and KRW 16,630 for unpaid water and sewage supply and sewage, and KRW 29,709,380,000 for unpaid water and sewage, and KRW 5,290,620,00 if
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2-5, 9, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion that although the Defendants were obligated to restore the lease lease agreement of this case to its original state, the Plaintiffs failed to restore it to its original state and paid KRW 8,825,00 to its original state, so even if the remainder of the lease deposit (5,290,620) remains after deducting the overdue rent, etc., the Defendants still have the obligation to pay KRW 3,534,380 to the Plaintiffs.
The defendants have to use the store of this case for a long time, and natural matha has to occur, and even if the defendants returned to the state at the time of the lease, the plaintiffs' building.