임대차보증금
1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff’s delivery of 75.9 square meters on the second floor among the buildings listed in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. On August 14, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) leased the instant real estate owned by E from August 24, 2017 to August 23, 2018; (b) determined the lease deposit amount of KRW 50,000,000; (c) monthly rent of KRW 4,00,000; and (d) monthly management expenses of KRW 130,000; (c) between E and E, the Plaintiff agreed to provide a special agreement between E to lease the instant real estate in the current state; (b) to separately cooperate with each other in installing signboards and facilities outside the current state (protruding signboards, second floor stairss, walls, etc.); and (d) thereafter, the Plaintiff moved into the instant real estate and opened a restaurant in Vietnam with the mutual name of “F” around September 8, 2017 (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).
(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Meanwhile, prior to the Plaintiff, the lessee of the instant real estate operated an ordinary restaurant called “G” in the instant real estate.
B. On December 29, 2017, the Defendants purchased buildings indicated in the separate sheet, including the instant real estate, from E, and the lease deposit against the Plaintiff, etc. was deducted from the balance of the purchase price, and the Defendants agreed to succeed to the lease agreement. On January 30, 2018, the Defendants succeeded to the lessor’s status against the Plaintiff by completing the registration of ownership transfer with one-half shares, respectively.
C. Meanwhile, on January 25, 2018, before completing the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendants, E filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the name map, etc. of the building with this court 2018Kadan1554, which was served on February 13, 2018, after the copy of the complaint was registered for the transfer of ownership to the Defendants. This court held on June 27, 2018 that “the Plaintiff was not paid rent at all after the instant lease was made.” The instant lease agreement was legitimate as of February 13, 2018, which was served on the Plaintiff on the part of the Plaintiff, a copy of the complaint, etc. indicating the intention to terminate the contract on the grounds of delinquency in rent.