기타(금전)
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, except where the defendant added a “additional Judgment” as to the assertion added by the court of first instance, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil
2. Additional determination
A. (1) Determination of the Defendant’s assertion as to the violation of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act (hereinafter “Standard Terms and Conditions Regulation Act”) (1) see that each of the leased premises of this case referred to in Article 5(1) of the Rental Sale Contracts of this case refers to only the “exclusive area” which does not take into account the common area, and to deem that an increase or decrease of the public area that does not match with an increase or decrease in exclusive use area includes an increase or decrease of the common area as it goes against the principle of good faith
(2) A judgment (A) Article 6(1) and (2)1 of the Act on the Regulation of Terms and Conditions that unreasonably unfavorable to a customer under Article 6(1) and (2)1 of the same Act, to be deemed null and void on the ground that the terms and conditions are “unfairly unfair terms and conditions contrary to the principle of trust and good faith.” It is insufficient to say that the standardized contract terms and conditions are somewhat unfavorable to the customer. It is acknowledged that the standardized contract terms and conditions contractor abused his position in transaction and prepares and uses the standardized contract terms and conditions contrary to the legitimate interests and reasonable expectations of the contracting party, thereby impairing the sound trade order. Thus, whether the standardized contract terms and conditions are “unfairly unfavorable terms and conditions to the customer” should be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the content and probability of disadvantage that may arise to the customer under
(Supreme Court Order 2007Ma1328 Decided December 16, 2008 and Supreme Court Decision 2013Da214864 Decided June 12, 2014, etc.).