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 May 26, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into the first lease contract with the term of KRW 350 million and the term of the lease from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2012 with respect to the apartment units listed in the separate sheet, which were owned by the Plaintiff. The Defendant resided in the said apartment units from July 1, 2010 to June 1, 2010.
B. On June 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant renewed the lease contract with the term of 12 months from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013 with respect to the above apartment as follows: (a) the lease deposit was extended by 350 million won as before; and (b) the lease contract was extended by 50 million won on June 4, 2013 to 6 months from July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013; and (c) the term of the lease is extended by 40 million won as the extension of the lease contract; and (d) the lease contract was automatically extended by November 30, 2013 unless there is any intention to terminate the lease contract by November 30, 2013.
C. Since then, the above lease agreement was explicitly renewed until June 30, 2016, and on June 24, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a new lease agreement and the monthly lease agreement by setting the lease term as 12 months from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017, by adding the lease deposit amount to KRW 400,000,000 to monthly rent, and the lease term was extended to KRW 500,000 as 12 months.
On October 21, 2016, the Plaintiff sold the above apartment in KRW 1.09 billion at the transaction price to C, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 24, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] No. 1, Gap evidence No. 2-1 to 4, Eul evidence No. 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the cause of the instant claim. The lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on June 24, 2016 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was concluded by deceiving the Plaintiff as if the Defendant had ordered the said apartment around June 30, 2017, which was one year after the Plaintiff, and thus, it is alleged that it was revoked by the declaration of intent by fraud pursuant to Article 110 of the Civil Act.