손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Basic Facts
On July 1, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant C on six parcels of land, such as Boan-si D, and two livestock shed buildings on such land, with a view to operating a swine farm (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). From July 1, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the rent of KRW 2.5 million per month, and from July 1, 2012, with a view to operating a swine farm.
The terms and conditions of the instant lease agreement are as follows: “The Plaintiff’s total management, statutory management, and wastewater and fire are responsible for the Plaintiff.” The government offices and surrounding areas are managed by Defendant C.”
The Plaintiff divided the down payment of KRW 2.5 million into the Defendant B’s account, the spouse of Defendant C, with KRW 1 million on July 6, 2012, and KRW 1.5 million on July 8, 2012.
On April 11, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that Defendant C was unable to commence the farm operation because the said Defendant did not obtain permission to discharge wastewater pursuant to the instant lease agreement, and that the instant lease agreement was revoked.
[Ground of recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3-1, and the purport of the whole pleading as to the plaintiff's claim against defendant C, the plaintiff asserted that ① entering into the lease agreement of this case and agreed upon to obtain permission for discharging wastewater by special agreement, thereby failing to operate the farm, thereby preventing the plaintiff from operating the farm. ② Among the leased objects of this case, one livestock shed was suspended from construction of livestock pens with the claim that the plaintiff would not repair livestock pens from E on the land owned by Eul, and the result that the defendant C adjusted the contents of removal of the livestock shed with E and the above livestock shed after which the plaintiff was unable to operate the farm by using the livestock shed.
As such, Defendant C breached the duty to use and benefit from the leased object as a lessor pursuant to the instant lease agreement, so the Plaintiff cancelled the said lease agreement on April 11, 2013, and Defendant C down payment to the Plaintiff.