건물인도 등
1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above part is revoked.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On November 14, 2014, the Plaintiff leased the instant store used by the former lessee as beauty room to the Defendant as the lease deposit amount of KRW 25,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,200,000 (paid on November 15, 201), and the period from November 15, 2014 to November 15, 2016, respectively.
(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). At the time of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant acquired air conditioners, beauty art ices, etc. from the Plaintiff among the facilities installed at the instant store from the Plaintiff.
B. On November 15, 2014, the Defendant: (a) received the instant store from the Plaintiff on November 15, 2014; (b) installed a wall and door door in the instant store on November 18, 2014; and (c) operated a beauty room in half of the instant store; and (d) operated a real estate brokerage office in the remainder.
C. On February 3, 2017, the Defendant moved out of the instant store, and deposited the key of the instant store with the deposited person as the Plaintiff on February 9, 2017. On April 16, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 26,616,438 with the deposited person as the Defendant.
Even after the Defendant’s eviction, the instant store was left alone with garbage, such as ① four cosmetics, four cosmetics, four strings, and crowdfundings, ② large-sized vessels, ③ air-conditionings and TV, ④ clothes, ⑤ shampoo and water pipes in the beauty room, ② Professor Cambling team and shampoo and water pipes, and ② Cambling team, ② Cambling team, ② Cambling team, ② Cambling team, ② Cambing team, ③ 10 small-sized vessels, glass walls, walls, boilers and gas pipes, signboards, flooring days, and remote areas, etc. (However, the Defendant did not install the entire facilities). The Defendant attached to the glass hold of the instant store in question, “provisional attachment”, and “this shop is currently pending due to interference with the building owner’s contract,” and put up a signboard in white.
E. On October 8, 2018, while the first instance court was continuing, the Plaintiff cancelled the locking system and removed the said facilities by entering the instant store.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's 1, 8, 9, .