Plaintiff and the Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Happiness

2. The plaintiff's successor's claim is dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant, and the costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff successor.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The Plaintiff’s Intervenor’s Intervenor (hereinafter “Successor”): The Defendant delivers to the Intervenor each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and pays the amount calculated by applying the ratio of KRW 6,400,000 and KRW 400,000 per month from April 11 to the completion date of delivery of each of the above real estate.

A. On June 29, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the Defendant for each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) with the lease deposit of KRW 1 million, KRW 400,000 per month (payment on the 10th day of each month in advance), and the lease term of June 29, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant lease contract”). Meanwhile, Article 4 of the instant lease contract provides that “If the lessee fails to pay the rent for two months, the lessor may terminate the lease contract.”

B. The instant lease agreement has been implicitly renewed, and the Defendant, upon delivery of the instant real estate, filed a move-in report on August 10, 2012, and thereafter possessed the instant real estate until now. It did not pay the difference from January 10, 2018.

C. On February 2, 2020, the Plaintiff sold the instant real estate to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) and D completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 28, 2020, and D completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 25, 2020 to the succeeding intervenor on May 25, 2020.

2. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim

According to the above facts, the defendant did not pay two or more rents, and the fact that the plaintiff delivered to the defendant on May 27, 2020 that the complaint of this case containing the plaintiff's declaration of intent to terminate the lease contract of this case on the grounds of the above delinquency in rent is apparent in the record. Thus, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated on May 27, 2020.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff and pay the amount of KRW 1,20,000,000 not paid for 26 months from January 10, 2018 to April 9, 2018 (=400,000 won X 28 months), as sought by the Plaintiff, 8.6 million won and the amount of money calculated by applying the rate of KRW 400,000 per month to the rent or rent equivalent to the amount of unjust enrichment from April 10, 2020 to the completion date of delivery of the instant real estate.

3. Judgment on the succeeding intervenor's assertion

The succeeding intervenor, when concluding a sales contract on the instant real estate between the Plaintiff and D, shall leave the Defendant and deliver the instant real estate to D. In the event that the succeeding intervenor failed to comply with the contract, he decided to transfer all the rent and rights including the unpaid monthly rent of the Defendant on the following day after the date of receipt of the registration of ownership transfer to D. D asserts to the effect that the succeeding intervenor, as the succeeding intervenor, may file a claim against the Defendant for the delivery and unpaid rent and unjust enrichment of the instant real estate as the subject to whom the rights and obligations of the trust property are attributed.

According to the evidence evidence No. 12, the plaintiff is deemed to have entered into the above contract with D, but there is no evidence to prove the fact that the plaintiff, who is the above transfer of right, notified the defendant of the transfer of right. Thus, it is reasonable to view that D and the successor cannot claim the defendant for delivery of the real estate in this case and the unpaid rent and unjust enrichment based on the above contract for the transfer of right, and that the plaintiff, the lessor of the instant lease, still remains such right.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified, and the successor's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.