beta
Text
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
A. Of 132.73 square meters in a single-story store in Jeonbuk-gun, D cement block structure, splate roof, etc.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. On March 7, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) indicated a map in the attached Form No. 1, B, C, C, C, C C Cement block structure, splate roof 132.73 square meters in a single-story store; and (b) linked approximately 20 square meters in a ship (hereinafter “instant store”) in sequence to the Defendant, each point of which was connected by the Plaintiff.
(2) The Defendant did not pay KRW 3,000,000 for annual rent for 24 months, deposit amounting to KRW 5,000,000, and KRW 3,000 for rent year. (2) The Defendant did not pay KRW 3,000 for annual rent.
3) On March 2, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to deliver the instant store and pay the unpaid rent, etc. without having any idea to renew or renew the lease contract, but the Defendant did not reply thereto. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]
B. According to the above facts, since the lease contract for the store of this case was terminated due to the expiration of the period of validity, the defendant is obligated to deliver the store of this case to the plaintiff and pay the unpaid rent of KRW 3,000,000,000. Further, since March 17, 2016, the plaintiff sought from March 17, 2016 to the date of transferring the store of this case to the plaintiff, the defendant is obligated to return the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 250,000 per month (the rent of this case is KRW 1,50,000,000 if divided into 12 months) from the date of transferring the store of this case to the date of transferring it to the plaintiff. 2) Further, the plaintiff claimed that the deposit under the lease contract was set at KRW 5,00,000, but the defendant was not paid KRW 1,000,000 among them.
However, in the event that a lease contract is terminated, the security deposit should be refunded, and even if part of the security deposit is unpaid as alleged by the Plaintiff, it is reasonable to deem that such claim cannot be filed as long as the lease contract for the store of this case is terminated.
Therefore, this part of the plaintiff.