건물명도 등
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
(a) deliver 66.24 square meters of one floor among the buildings listed in the attached list;
B. 5,600,000 won and August 2017
1. The fact that no dispute exists, and comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings in each statement in Gap 1 through 4, the non-party C, on October 1, 2016, operated a store of 66.24 square meters on the first floor among the buildings listed in the attached list (hereinafter “lease object of the building of this case”) as a lease deposit of 5 million won, monthly rent of 70,000 won (payment on October 1, 2016), and lease period from October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2018 (hereinafter “the lease contract of this case”). Article 4 of the lease contract of this case provides that “if a lessee has failed to pay rent two or more times, the lessor may terminate the lease contract without delay,” and the defendant purchased the lease contract of this case from the leased object of this case to the defendant on December 28, 2016, and the plaintiff can be acknowledged as having purchased the building of this case on December 19, 2016.
According to the above facts, the Plaintiff appears to succeed to the lessor’s status of the instant lease agreement. Since the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on the grounds of nonperformance, such as the Defendant’s delay of rent, etc. on August 8, 2017, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the leased object of this case to the Plaintiff, and to pay the Plaintiff a rent of KRW 5,60,000 (from December 1, 2016 to July 31, 2017) and a rent of KRW 5,600,000 (from August 1, 2017 to July 31, 2017) and a rent of KRW 700,000 per month from August 1, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the leased object of this case.
2. In regard to this, the defendant's husband, Eul, the former owner, paid KRW 35 million to non-party F, the former lessee, around April 2013 under the permission of the former owner Eul, which is the defendant's husband, and acquired the leased object of this case, so it is impossible to respond to the plaintiff's claim. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion.