beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B: The real estate listed in the separate sheet;
B. Defendant C is the above.
of the immovable property described in paragraph (1).
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a provisional number), the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B on August 27, 2015 with the term of lease deposit of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 500,000 (excluding value-added tax), and the term of lease of the real estate specified in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) from August 27, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”). The instant lease agreement states that “the third lessee may not change the use or structure of the said real estate without the lessor’s consent or sub-lease, transfer the right of lease or offer the security, or use it for any purpose other than the purpose of lease. If the fourth lessee fails to pay the rent (rent) for the second period, the lessor may terminate the lease agreement if the Plaintiff and Defendant B did not have any dispute between the Plaintiff and the instant lease agreement at the time of the instant default.”
B. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff, the lessee, was served on October 5, 2018 by the complaint of this case, which included the Plaintiff’s declaration of the termination of the instant lease on at least two occasions pursuant to the delinquency in rent, and the instant lease contract was legally terminated. As such, Defendant B is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, Defendant B, on February 15, 2019, lost possession of the instant building by subleting the instant building to J and K, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for the delivery of the instant building against Defendant B is unjust.
However, in the event of a claim for the delivery of real estate on the ground of an illegal possession, the delivery should be made according to the agreement, contrary to what should be done against the actual possessor.