건물인도
1. The defendant delivers to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list, and the defendant shall enter 1.2 million won and the attached list from April 4, 2020.
On April 4, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting a deposit of KRW 3 million, KRW 300,000,000 per month (after April 4, 2018), and from April 4, 2018 to April 3, 2020 (24 months) with regard to the building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”). Under the instant lease agreement, the Defendant was transferred the instant building and used the instant building until November 2019, but was paid by the Defendant on or after December 4, 2019, but the fact that the instant building was used without paying the rent after December 4, 2019 does not conflict between the parties, or can be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of pleadings as stated in the evidence No. 1 and No. 2.
On the other hand, the fact that the copy of the complaint of this case, stating the plaintiff's declaration of intention to terminate the lease contract on the ground that the defendant was in arrears with three or more times of arrears, was delivered to the defendant on July 7, 2020, is clearly recorded, and thus, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated.
Therefore, the Defendant, as a duty to restore to the Plaintiff, delivers the instant building, which is the leased object, to the Plaintiff, and pays 1.2 million won (=300,000 won x 4 months) unpaid for a period of four months from December 4, 2019 to April 3, 2020, and is obliged to pay the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 300,000 per month from April 4, 2020 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building.
In response, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim because the plaintiff agreed to pay director's expenses and did not perform them.
However, there was no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff agreed to pay the director fee despite the Defendant’s delinquency in rent, and there was an agreement to pay the cruel director fee.
Even if the defendant's obligation to return the building of this case or the unpaid rent or unjust enrichment.