beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.01 2014가합585308

임대료

Text

1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 229,90,00 and KRW 217,800,00 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 12,10,000 from November 1, 2014, and KRW 12,10,000.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the grounds for the claim Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on September 1, 2010 with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 130,00,000 among the Defendant and Kimpo-si C, D, E land 4,946§³ and its ground buildings, and with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 1,437 square meters, from September 1, 2010 to March 31, 2015 (including value-added tax, and payment after the first day of each month), and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the Plaintiff on September 1, 201 to October 31, 2014 with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 130,00,000 and the total amount of the rent was not paid by 229,000,000.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 229,90,000 won in total and 217,800,000 won among the unpaid rents and 217,80,000 won in total after the due date, as requested by the plaintiff, for the rent of 12,10,000 won in October 1, 2014, and as for the rent of 12,100,000 won after the due date, there is a reasonable ground to dispute as to the existence and scope of each defendant's obligation from November 2, 2014 to May 1, 2015, which is the date the ruling of this case is rendered, to pay 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act and 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.

(1) The Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay at a rate of 20% per annum from November 1, 2014 to the date of full payment of the unpaid rent. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the Plaintiff’s claim is recognized within the above recognition scope. 2. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim for this case is justified within the above recognition scope, and the remainder of the claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.