건물명도 등
1. The Defendants jointly do so to the Plaintiff:
(a) deliver each real estate listed in the separate sheet;
(b) from May 25, 2016.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 25, 2014, the Plaintiff leased each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Defendants as the monthly rent of 200,000 won, and the period of September 25, 2024. On September 25, 2024, the monthly rent determined that the Defendants may terminate the contract if the Defendants were to pay the monthly rent in advance for ten months or more, but if the Defendants were to pay in arrears for more than two months, the contract may be terminated
(hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”). B.
Accordingly, on September 25, 2014, the Plaintiff handed over each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Defendants. Accordingly, the Defendants paid KRW 2 million to the Plaintiff for the first ten months (from September 25, 2014 to July 24, 2015).
C. Following the occurrence of the dispute between the Plaintiff and the rental fee, the Defendants deposited the rent of KRW 2 million in the next ten-month portion (from July 25, 2015 to May 24, 2016) on June 1, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Defendants deposited the second ten-month difference from the date of the payment (round July 25, 2015), which is the second ten-month difference. Thus, the instant lease contract was lawfully terminated by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent of termination by filing the instant lawsuit on the grounds of the Defendants’ delinquency in rent.
(A) Although the Defendant provided a rent at a fixed time, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff refused to demand and receive the rent increase. Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to return each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff and pay KRW 200,000 per month from May 25, 2016 to the date of the completion of delivery.
(The plaintiff asserts that it is KRW 250,000 per month, and the defendant asserts that it is KRW 2 million in 12 months, but all of them are not admitted). 3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is accepted within the above recognition scope, and the remaining claim is groundless.