beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 21,700,000 as well as 5% per annum from June 5, 2015 to February 19, 2016 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 8, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 200,000,000, and the period from May 7, 2015 to May 7, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 20,000,000,00.
B. The remainder of KRW 180,000,000, was agreed to pay the remainder on May 7, 2015. The Plaintiff agreed to “the lessee is expected to obtain a loan for a loan for a loan for a lease on a deposit basis and the lessor cooperates with each other” as the terms and conditions of the instant lease agreement, as the Plaintiff was planned to obtain a loan for a loan
C. The Plaintiff established a pledge on the claim for the return of the lease deposit against the Defendant by Samsung Bio-stock Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Tsung Bio-Co.”), and agreed to obtain a loan of KRW 140,00,000 for the lease deposit. An employee of Samsung Bio-Co., Ltd. who was a lending institution requested the Defendant to sign a pledge establishment acceptance and a pledge return commitment on April 13, 2015, but the Defendant rejected it, and accordingly the Plaintiff was unable to obtain a loan from Samsung Bio-Co., Ltd.
On May 1, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease contract will be cancelled due to the Defendant’s failure to comply with the Defendant’s special agreement.
[Reasons for Recognition] Gap's evidence 1 to 6, 11 to 13, Eul's evidence 1, 2 and 4, witness D's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of the judgment on the plaintiff's claim for the return of down payment, the defendant's failure to perform his duty to cooperate in the loan of the lease on a deposit basis as stipulated in the instant lease agreement, the plaintiff's cause attributable to the defendant becomes unable to prepare the balance of the lease agreement of this case, and the obligation to pay down the lease of this case cannot be fulfilled.