beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.09.20 2018나6631

임차보증금반환

Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

A. We examine the amount of rent and management fee.

The defendant asserts that unpaid rent and management fee are 14,727,179 won, and the above amount includes general management fee and common electricity and water supply fee in addition to the general management fee of the commercial building in this case.

However, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff moved the office around October 31, 2017 from the commercial building to another place, and there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff used the household electricity fee after November 2017.

Therefore, among the management expenses imposed on the instant commercial building, KRW 1,148,755 shall not be deemed to be the Plaintiff’s liability for the aggregate of the household electricity charges and late payment charges incurred after November 2017. Therefore, the unpaid rent and management expenses should be deducted from the amount of unpaid rent and management expenses.

Therefore, the amount of rent and management fee of the instant commercial building unpaid by the Plaintiff is 13,578,424 (=14,727,179) - 1,148,755).

(1) Household electric charges (i.e., additional tax 10%) x 1.25% per month of overdue interest x unpaid period) * unit: source (there forest less than won 101,040 x 16,671 11,460 1,733, 2018. 72,4639,963

2. 59,080 7,311

3. 85,430 9,397

4. 61,840 5,952

5. 31,763 2,620

6. 14,194 975

7. 60,220 3,312

8. 165,190 6,814

9. 167,480 4,605 85,280 1,172 162,078,230,230 162,790 162,230,525 2. 1,148,755 4) as to the amount of the deposit the Defendant has to pay, as seen earlier, 13,578,424 won in total and management expenses that the Plaintiff unpaid by November 24, 2018, 200 20,000 20,576 won in the lease contract of this case deducting the above unpaid rent and management expenses (=20,000,000 -13,578,4245 - 2751,27527,2751,2757). Thus, it is clear that the Defendant paid the remainder to the Plaintiff within the extent of the deposit to be returned to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant.