퇴거 등
1. On March 7, 2012, the Defendant received on March 7, 201 from the Daejeon District Court, the competent registry office of the Daejeon District Court regarding the building stated in the attached list.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 22, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant and the Plaintiff, setting a deposit of KRW 200 million, monthly rent of KRW 8.8 million (including value-added tax), and the period from March 7, 2012 to March 6, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
B. The Defendant paid 200 million won to the Plaintiff by March 7, 2012.
C. On March 7, 2012, the Defendant completed the registration for the establishment of chonsegwon (hereinafter “registration for the establishment of chonsegwon”) indicated in Paragraph (1) of the disposition that set the duration as the lease deposit for the instant building in order to secure the obligation to return the deposit deposit under the instant lease agreement, and completed the registration for the establishment of chonsegwon (hereinafter “registration for the establishment of chonsegwon”).
On March 7, 2012, the Defendant received delivery of the instant building and operated the telecom. From January 6, 2013, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff rent.
E. On March 11, 2014, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant each proof to the effect that “I would terminate the instant lease agreement as of March 18, 2014, if I would pay the entire rent by March 18, 2014,” and that “I would have terminated the instant lease agreement as of March 20, 2014,” respectively.
F. However, even after the Defendant continued to operate the telecom, the Defendant delivered the instant building to the Plaintiff on November 30, 2014.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry of Gap's 1 through 7 (including each number), and the purport of whole pleading
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was terminated on March 6, 201, and the Defendant’s right to lease on the same day expired. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to implement the procedure for registration cancellation of the instant right to lease on a deposit basis to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.
3. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The defendant alleged by the parties to this case from the plaintiff.