건물인도 등
1. The defendant shall display the first floor drawing from August 15, 2020 to 35,250,000 won from the plaintiff, to August 15, 202.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On November 25, 2019, the Plaintiff (the lessor) entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease agreement between KRW 60 million and KRW 4.55 square meters in the ship (hereinafter “instant building”) connected each point of (a), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1, among the real estate listed in the attached list as indicated in the attached list, with each point of (b), 94.5 square meters in sequence, among the real estate listed in the attached list, (a). < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 2634, Jan. 15, 2020; Presidential Decree No. 2504, Jan. 14, 2022>
After that, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the deposit amount of KRW 60 million (the amount of KRW 11.5 million among them was replaced by the Defendant’s direct payment to the construction company for the purpose of rebuilding the building). (B) Article 7(2) of the instant lease agreement provides that the lessor may terminate the contract in the event that the lessee fails to pay the rent to the lessee for the amount of rent for three terms.
(c)
The Defendant did not pay a total of five months from March 2020 to July 2020. The Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content on July 7, 2020, which included the intent to terminate the instant lease on the grounds of not less than three years of delay in rent, and reached the Defendant around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 17, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts finding, the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the ground of the Defendant’s failure to pay rent for more than three years in arrears has been terminated by the termination of the instant lease agreement on July 2020, which was delivered to the Defendant.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff and pay unfair benefits equivalent to the overdue rent or rent to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.
The defendant, in addition to the lease agreement of this case, has various interference with the plaintiff's getting off the store in operation and managing the building in the building of this case.