건물명도(인도)
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the Defendant jointly and severally file for KRW 10,200,000 with the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the same on November 2018.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
Basic Facts
- On August 18, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) via her husband D, an agent, KRW 30,00,00 (the Defendants agreed to pay KRW 3,00,000 on the date of the contract, KRW 27,00,000 on the date of the contract, KRW 27,00,000 on September 8, 2017), monthly rent 2,00,000, and monthly rent 8 days after the payment date, and the lease period from September 8, 2017 to September 7, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease”).
- The Defendants paid 3,00,000 won out of the deposit on August 18, 2017 to the Plaintiff, but the remaining 27,000,000 won was not paid until September 8, 2017, which was the agreed date.
- The Defendants received delivery of the instant building from the Plaintiff on September 8, 2017, and operated an enterprise “E” (hereinafter “instant enterprise”).
- On September 26, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendants a certificate of content that the Plaintiff would cancel the instant lease agreement without paying KRW 27,000,000 to the Defendants until September 29, 2017. At that time, the Defendants reached the Defendants’ delivery, but the Defendants did not pay KRW 27,00,000 to the Plaintiff.
- On December 12, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendants a certificate of content to the effect that the instant lease contract will be cancelled on the grounds of the non-payment of deposit, and reached the Defendants around that time.
[Grounds for recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, Eul evidence Nos. 5 and 12 (the number is included; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the whole purport of the pleadings, and the facts of the foundation for establishing the obligation to return unjust enrichment upon the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against the main claim of the lawsuit as a whole, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated according to the plaintiff's declaration of termination on the ground that the contract of this case was not paid a deposit by the defendants, and the defendants are obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, and the defendants occupied and used the building of this case after the termination