임대차보증금
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Plaintiff’s assertion
On February 8, 2011, the Plaintiff leased the real estate stated in paragraph (1) of this case’s claim (hereinafter “instant store”) from the Defendant as the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1 million, and the lease period of KRW 20 million from February 28, 201, and started business upon delivery of the instant store.
After that, on March 1, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a lease contract with the Defendant on the condition that the instant store was leased by the Defendant as KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.1 million, and the lease period from March 1, 2015 to March 36, 2015, and continued operations at the instant store.
The termination date of the lease agreement under the above Paragraph (b) was February 28, 2018, or the above lease agreement was implicitly renewed.
(B) The Plaintiff made clear that the lease agreement remains in force until February 28, 2021, on the second date for pleading, and on October 5, 2020, the part concerning the termination of the lease agreement among the preparatory documents dated October 5, 2020 was erroneous, and the present lease agreement still remains in force.
However, on June 19, 2019, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to directly operate the instant lease agreement without extending the above lease agreement. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the instant store from the Plaintiff.
In addition, the defendant notified the direct management of the store of this case to the person who intends to become a new lessee without any justifiable reason, and finally expressed his intention not to conclude the lease contract. This constitutes a refusal under Article 10-4 (1) 4 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, which constitutes an act of refusal under Article 10-4 (3) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and pursuant to Article 10-4 (3) of the same Act, the defendant, a lessor, as the plaintiff, is entitled to 30 million