beta
Text
1. For the plaintiffs:
(a) Defendant E orders each building listed in paragraphs 1 through 6 of the attached list;
B. Defendant F shall be.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
On April 13, 2015, between Defendant E and F, the Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with Defendant E to lease each of the buildings listed in [Attachment List Nos. 1 through 6 to KRW 70 million for the lease deposit, monthly rent of KRW 6 million for the lease period from October 30, 2015 to October 29, 2017, and Defendant F entered into a lease agreement with each of the following terms: (a) the building listed in [Attachment List Nos. 7 and 8 to KRW 30 million for the lease deposit, monthly rent of KRW 2 million for the lease period from October 30, 2015 to October 29, 2017 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant lease agreements”).
Defendant E operated a restaurant in the name of “G” in the building listed in the attached list 1 through 6, and Defendant F operated the restaurant in the name of “H” from the building listed in the attached list 7 and 8.
However, the Defendants did not pay monthly rent for more than four months from June 2016.
Accordingly, around December 16, 2016, the Plaintiffs notified the Defendants that each of the instant lease agreements was terminated on the grounds that the monthly rent was overdue.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including each number, if there is a serial number), and the facts of the above recognition as to the grounds for the claim based on the whole purport of the arguments. Thus, each of the instant lease agreements was lawfully terminated due to the defendants' delinquency in payment of monthly rent. Thus, barring special circumstances, the plaintiffs are obliged to issue each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 through 6, and the defendant F is obligated to issue an order to order each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet No. 7 and No. 8.
The Defendants’ assertion and its determination as to the Defendants are asserted to the effect that: (a) around November 15, 2016, the Defendants agreed to pay the overdue charge to the Plaintiffs as set out in the apartment owned by the Defendants; (b) but (c) the Defendants suspended the due date for the payment of the overdue charge; (d) but (c) on the sole basis of the statements in the evidence No. 6-1 and No. 2