beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 28, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant (Co., Ltd. (formerly before the change: C) to lease the second floor from the Defendant to operate the cafeteria (hereinafter “instant cafeteria”).
(hereinafter “instant contract”). The main contents of the instant contract are as follows.
The period: Deposit from November 15, 2018 to November 14, 2020: 200 million won (to substitute for a surety insurance policy; 120 million won at the time of cash payment): Rent (basic rent): KRW 20 million per month: Provided, That the rent shall be reduced in part by April 2019, the initial operation period.
Fees: The plaintiff shall pay to the defendant a fixed fee (8% if the number of food is less than 40,836 per month) in addition to the monthly rent.
If the average number of persons on a monthly basis is less than 31,200 for three months from February 2019 to April 2019, the rate of commission from May 2019 shall be re-consultation.
Restoration: The plaintiff shall restore to its original state, if necessary at the time of termination of the contract of this case. If the plaintiff fails to complete by the end of the contract of this case, the defendant may restore to its original state at his own expense and claim
B. Since then, there was an anticipated decrease in the number of food resources due to the circumstances of some shop occupants, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to additionally reduce the basic rent at the early stage of operation (up to April 2019) around November 2018.
C. As a result of the Plaintiff’s operation of the instant restaurant by April 2019, the average number of food per month from February 2, 2019 to April 2019 falls short of 31,200, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant re-consultationd on the fee rate.
However, at a meeting held on April 30, 2019, the plaintiff's side and the defendant's side did not narrow the different opinions, and the plaintiff's side expressed that the other company had the intention to transfer the instant restaurant to the other company.
E. Afterward, the Defendant shall operate another company that operates the instant restaurant.