beta
(영문) 청주지방법원 2015.09.16 2015가단104572

원상회복 등 청구의 소

Text

1. The defendant shall receive 7,000,000 from the plaintiff, and at the same time, 76.82 square meters of the underground floor among the real estate listed in the attached Table.

Reasons

1. Around April 2009, the Defendant leased 76.82 square meters of underground floors and 245.507 square meters of one story (hereinafter “instant building”) among the real estate listed in the attached Table on the attached list.

(No. 1) On March 21, 2013, C acquired the ownership of the instant building through a voluntary auction on real estate on April 26, 2013 entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant (a security deposit of KRW 7 million, monthly rent of KRW 650,000, and two years from March 21, 2013).

On January 7, 2015, C sent a certificate of content that it refuses to renew the contract to the defendant.

(No. 3-2) On April 16, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant building.

(A) The Defendant paid monthly rent to the instant building until August 21, 2015, and currently operates a restaurant from the instant building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of each of the above documentary evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Article 10(2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act provides that "The right to request the renewal of the contract of a lessee may only be exercised within the extent that the whole period of the lease does not exceed five years, including the initial term of the lease." In light of the language and text of the above Act and the legislative intent that recognized the lessee's right to request the renewal of the contract within the extent of five years, the term "the initial term of the lease" means the term of the lease contract concluded after the enforcement of the above Act or the lease contract renewed after the enforcement of the above Act, which was concluded before the enforcement of the above Act, and all the terms of the lease contract renewed after the enforcement of the above Act, and it does not need to be the same person as the lessor and the present lessor who entered into the first lease contract.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da74320, Mar. 23, 2006). The Defendant entered into an initial lease contract on the instant building.