전세금반환(등)
1. The Defendants jointly share the same with the delivery of 104.72 square meters on the first floor among the real estate listed in the attached Table from the Plaintiff.
1. On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with Defendant C, setting a deposit of KRW 30,000,000 on the first floor among the real estate listed in the attached Form, which is owned by Defendant C, as KRW 1,50,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,50,000, and the period from June 8, 2015 to June 8, 2017 (24 months), and entered into a contract under the name of Defendant E, the mother of the Plaintiff, who has the nationality of the Republic of Korea, following the Plaintiff’s shipbuilding.
The lower end of the instant lease agreement is indicated as follows:
(1) Premium: (2) If a lessor reverses a contract before the expiration of the contract period, it shall be compensated for 1.5 times premium. (3) Even after the contract period expires, the right to the premium shall be vested on the lessee.
On June 2, 2015, the Plaintiff paid KRW 30,000,000 for lease deposit to Defendant D, the wife of Defendant C, and paid KRW 1,350,000 for the premium of KRW 60,000,000 and for the rent of KRW 1,350,00 for the premium of KRW 1,350,00 for the premium of June 8, 2015. At that time, the Plaintiff began to operate a singing practice room business after obtaining a business license under the name of the mother at the instant store.
On December 22, 2015, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a fine of KRW 500,000 in the Changwon District Court’s common support for the violation of the Music Industry Promotion Act. On November 30, 2016, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1,500,000 in the Changwon District Court’s common support for the same crime.
The Plaintiff paid only rent for 17 months from October 2016, and did not pay rent from November 2016.
[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 7, 11, and 12; the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) reported the Plaintiff’s use of alcoholic beverages and helpers to sell alcoholic beverages and use them so that the Plaintiff was subject to business suspension and paid a fine two times. The Defendants are not obliged to refund the premium due to the revocation of permission for running a singing practice room business where the Plaintiff, who is a shipbuilding yard, was punished three times a year.