점포명도등
1. The defendant is attached to the buildings listed in the separate sheet from February 20, 2014 to KRW 33,000,000 from the plaintiffs.
1. On February 1, 2013, the Plaintiffs, upon the termination of a lease agreement, leased the part of the building stipulated in paragraph (1) of the order (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant as KRW 33,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 150,000, and from February 20, 2013 to February 19, 2014. Accordingly, the Defendant was paid a deposit for the lease from the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant occupied and used the instant building from around that time to February, 2014. The Defendant requested the Defendant to deliver the building portion in writing by February 14, 2014, which is the time when the said lease agreement expires, to the Defendant by February 19, 2014, and according to the above lease agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, the unpaid portion should be paid to the Plaintiffs at the latest or late February 19, 2015.
2. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant agreed to follow the Housing Lease Protection Act at the time of the aforementioned lease agreement, and the said lease agreement period under the relevant provisions of the Housing Lease Protection Act is deemed to have been implicitly renewed until February 19, 2016, and thus, the Plaintiffs cannot respond to the Plaintiffs’ request for the delivery of the part of the instant building. However, in light of the witness D’s testimony, etc., the Housing Lease Protection Act’s phrase “other matters shall be governed by the Housing Lease Protection Act and contract practices” stipulated in the special terms of the lease agreement “the Housing Lease Protection Act” is merely a phrase unrefilledly left without deletion in the course of using other types of contracts, and it is explicitly or explicitly stipulated in the aforementioned special terms.