beta
Text
1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:
(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;
B. From August 20, 2019, KRW 23.2 million and from August 20, 2019
Reasons
1. The facts of recognition are as follows: (a) around March 15, 2016, the Plaintiffs leased the building listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant as monthly rent of KRW 4 million (excluding value-added tax); (b) around September 2016, the Plaintiffs decided to increase the deposit amount of KRW 20 million, but did not pay increased KRW 10 million; (c) later, the Defendant did not pay monthly rent, etc. from July 2018 to January 23, 2019; (d) the Plaintiffs finally notified the Defendant of the termination of the lease contract; and (e) the amount equivalent to the monthly rent that the Defendant failed to pay on July 2019 to KRW 30,3200,000; and (e) the Defendant did not have any dispute between the parties to the instant building and the Defendant’s entire business number of KRW 10,000,000,000,000; and (e) the purport of each of the parties to the instant building including the dispute.
2. Determination:
A. According to the above findings of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the above lease contract was lawfully terminated by the notification of cancellation around January 23, 2019, which was made on the ground of delinquency in payment of monthly rent, and therefore, the defendant delivers the building of this case to the plaintiffs, and the defendant claims payment of the amount of KRW 23.2 million (=3,200,00 won - 10,000 won) calculated by deducting the deposit deposit amount from the amount of KRW 10 million.
In addition, from August 20, 2019 to August 20, 2019, unjust gains calculated by the ratio of KRW 4.4 million per month (including value-added tax) shall be returned.
B. The defendant's defense 1) The defendant defenses to the purport that ① the renewal request under Article 10 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, ② the protection of the opportunity to recover the premium under Article 10-4 of the same Act cannot be complied with. However, according to the proviso of Article 10 (1) and subparagraph 1 of the same Article, the tenant shall be entitled to the indemnity.