임대차보증금반환
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 4.
On October 25, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on 30,000,000 won for the deposit for the third floor of 235.93 square meters (hereinafter “the instant building”) among the building in Ulsan-gu C, Ulsan-gu, which is owned by the Defendant, for the rent of KRW 2,50,000 for each month, and for each period of KRW 2,50,000 for each rent of KRW 2,50,000 for each month, and paid KRW 30,000 for each lease deposit to the Defendant around that time.
B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant continued to renew the instant contract until October 24, 2014, decided to change the period of KRW 3,000,000 per month and October 24, 2014.
C. On April 21, 2014, the Plaintiff sent the content-certified mail to the Defendant that the instant contract will be terminated, and the Plaintiff removed from the instant building on May 23, 2014 and did not pay the rent after June 2014.
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion and the Plaintiff’s determination as to the assertion were lawfully terminated by the Plaintiff’s expression of intent of termination on April 21, 2014. The instant building was the same year.
5. 23. Since the defendant was delivered to the defendant, the defendant asserts that the defendant is obligated to return the deposit amount of KRW 30,000,000 under the contract of this case to the plaintiff.
In the event that there is an agreement on the term of lease, such as the contract in this case, one or both parties to the contract withheld the right to terminate the contract within the term.
contract can be terminated only when there are certain reasons for termination, such as failure of one party, etc.
The plaintiff has the right to terminate the contract within the period of time (Article 636 of the Civil Code).
Since there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was a ground for termination under the contract of this case, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
원고는 또, 그가 2014. 5. 23. 이 사건 건물에서 퇴거하면서 그 열쇠를 피고에게 건넸고...