건물명도(인도)
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) received KRW 55,036,567 from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) simultaneously.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. On May 6, 2010, the Plaintiff concluded a lease deposit agreement with the Defendant on the lease deposit amounting to KRW 60 million, KRW 200,000,000 per month of rent (in addition to value-added tax, and payment after the first day of each month), and the lease agreement with the period from May 1, 2010 to April 30, 2012 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and concluded a special agreement stipulating that “the lease agreement shall be returned to the original state at the lessee’s expense before the date of return of the real estate at the end of the lease agreement,” and “the lease agreement shall be returned to the original state at the time of the termination of the lease agreement.”
B. The Defendant operated a private teaching institute (hereinafter “private teaching institute”) in the instant building, and thereafter the instant lease contract has been implicitly renewed.
C. On June 10, 2016, the Defendant closed down the instant private teaching institute.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the termination of the instant lease agreement
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) indicated his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in payment of rent. Since the duplicate of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant on September 12, 2018, the instant lease agreement was terminated on September 12, 2018, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement on April 30, 2017. As such, the instant lease agreement was terminated on April 30, 2017.
B. We examine the following circumstances, i.e., the Defendant’s closure of the instant private teaching institute on June 10, 2016, and ② the transfer of the students of the instant private teaching institute after the closure of the private teaching institute, i.e., the instant transfer of the students of the instant private teaching institute to C, which is recognized as comprehensively taking account of the facts as seen earlier and the written evidence Nos. 3, 6, 7, and 22, and the testimony of the witness C.