건물인도 등
1. The Plaintiff:
A. The Defendants deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;
B. Defendant B shall be as from December 6, 2015.
1. Comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence No. 1 as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff’s real estate listed in the annexed list No. 1 may be acknowledged as having been leased on October 2, 2015 to Defendant B with a deposit of KRW 5 million, KRW 5 million per month, KRW 570,000 per month (payment after October 6, 2015), and the period from October 6, 2015 to October 5, 2016; the Plaintiff delivered the said real estate to Defendant B on October 6, 2015; the Plaintiff and Defendant B agreed that the lessor may terminate the contract at the time of the above lease; the Plaintiff and Defendant B did not pay the rent from December 6, 2015 to Defendant B; and the fact that the Defendant C resided in the said real estate.
According to the above facts, the Plaintiff, a lessor, may terminate the lease contract on the ground that the Defendant B, a lessee, was in arrears for at least two months. Since the duplicate of the complaint of this case, which contained the Defendant B’s declaration of intent to terminate the lease contract on the grounds of the rent delay, is apparent in the record, it was served on the Defendant B on April 4, 2016, the lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was lawfully terminated on April 4, 2016. The Defendants are obligated to deliver the said real estate to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated at the rate of KRW 570,000 per month from December 6, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the said real estate.
2. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants’ assertion on the assertion of the Defendants are purporting to the effect that the Defendants moved into the said real estate and paid the rent in arrears with the payment of the rent in advance, on the ground that the Defendants did not pay the rent in advance for a period of one month after the lapse of one month. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion, and therefore, the above assertion is without merit.
3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is accepted on the ground of the reasons.