beta
Text
The judgment of the first instance court is modified as follows. A.
Defendant KRW 20,307,200 to Plaintiff A, and KRW 17,598,00 to Plaintiff B.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 30, 201, Plaintiff A entered into a lease agreement with F, who is the former owner of three-story neighborhood living facilities in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu (hereinafter “instant commercial building”), setting the lease deposit of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,000,000, and two years (from May 30, 201 to May 30, 201) during the lease term of the instant commercial building.
On April 8, 2013, Plaintiff A entered into a lease agreement with the owner G, who is the heir of the instant commercial building, and the left-hand part of the instant commercial building (hereinafter “instant main store”) as KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,000,000, and one year (from April 30, 2013 to April 29, 2014) of the term of lease.
Plaintiff
A The term of lease was guaranteed until May 30, 2016, as the right to request the renewal of the contract was recognized for five years, and the end of the lease after implied renewal is May 30, 2017.
B. On February 19, 2013, Plaintiff B entered into a lease agreement with G and the instant commercial building by setting a deposit of KRW 15,000,000 for the right-hand part of the instant commercial building (hereinafter “instant singing room”), monthly rent of KRW 1,150,000, and from February 20, 2013 to February 19, 2015. Since the term of the lease expires, the term of the lease agreement was extended by two years from February 19, 2017 with G and one year after the termination of the said term of the lease agreement, and the end of the last lease agreement was explicitly renewed thereafter, and the end of the lease agreement was February 19, 2018.
C. The Defendant purchased the instant commercial building on or around March 25, 2016 and executed the same year.
4. 26. Completion of the registration of ownership transfer;
5. On November 1, 200, the Plaintiff filed a scenic suit against the lessee of the instant commercial building, including the Plaintiffs (this Court Decision 2016Kadan121861). At the time, the Defendant at the same time acquired the ownership of the instant commercial building, and the lessee who contracted with the former owner did not have the right to possess, and even if having the right to possess.