건물인도등
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 11, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the instant store of 117.03 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”) among the buildings listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant by setting the rental deposit of 30,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,400,000 (Additional Tax), and the lease period of May 20, 2015.
(hereinafter referred to as “the instant lease agreement”). (b)
On the other hand, the defendant is running the restaurant business in the trade name of C at the store of this case.
C. The Plaintiff obtained business approval from the Yeongdeungpo-gu Office on July 18, 2014 to remove the instant building and reconstruct new buildings, and notified the Defendant that the instant lease agreement cannot be renewed on or around September 25, 2014.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1-7 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant lease contract was terminated on May 20, 2015, as the building was a old building built in the year 1971 and was likely to be removed and constructed as a new building due to the risk of safety accidents. The Plaintiff refused to renew the instant lease contract.
Therefore, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to deliver the store of this case to the plaintiff and to pay unjust enrichment of 1.4 million won per month by the end of delivery.
The defendant asserts that the contract term can be renewed by May 20, 2018, which is five years from the date of conclusion of the contract pursuant to the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and that the reasons asserted by the plaintiff do not constitute the grounds for refusing the request for renewal of the contract, so the lease contract in this case still remains valid.
3. First of all, Article 10(1) proviso of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (amended by Act No. 12042, Aug. 13, 2013) provides that the Plaintiff may refuse the right to request the renewal of the contract under Article 10(1) proviso 7 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.