건물명도 등
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant is paid KRW 12,186,882 from the plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On April 19, 2008, the Plaintiff leased the instant building owned by the Defendant with the lease deposit of KRW 15 million, the lease period from April 19, 2008 to April 19, 2009 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and the Plaintiff transferred the said building to the Defendant on the day.
B. On April 19, 2010, the Plaintiff agreed to renew the above lease agreement with the Defendant and agreed to receive KRW 50,000 as monthly rent. On May 20, 2010, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 50,000 from the Defendant for April 20, 2010.
C. After March 2, 2012, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease contract to the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant did not pay the monthly rent, on or around March 2, 2012.
[Ground of recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 8 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to requests for the delivery of a building
A. According to the above facts of recognition as the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, the instant lease agreement is deemed legally terminated around March 2, 2012, on which the Plaintiff expressed his intention of termination due to the delay in payment of rent for more than two years by the Defendant. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.
B. As to the Defendant’s defense, the Defendant’s simultaneous performance defense that the Plaintiff could not comply with the Plaintiff’s request for the delivery of the instant lease deposit until the refund was made. Thus, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 15 million to the Plaintiff at the time of the instant lease agreement is not in dispute between the parties, and as seen earlier, that the instant lease agreement was terminated on March 2, 2012. Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to refund the instant lease deposit to the Defendant, barring any special circumstance, and the Defendant’s obligation to deliver the instant building is a simultaneous performance relationship with the Plaintiff’s obligation to return the lease deposit.
C. The plaintiff's second defense, etc. is asserted by one party.