logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.01.24 2018가단103898
보증금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are all dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants’ status (1) Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) is a company that operates the E Park (hereinafter “E”) in the Daegu-gun Dridong District in the sports park in question.

Defendant B owned a building listed in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant building”) in the instant play park.

(2) Defendant C is a director of Defendant B.

B. In order to operate the “toy experience site” on February 22, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to lease the part of 309.9 square meters of the instant building (hereinafter “instant business site”) from the Defendant B (hereinafter “instant lease”).

(2) The instant lease deposit was set at KRW 30 million.

The Plaintiff paid 18% of the sales amount of the instant building in return for the lease of the instant building, and ② even if the amount so calculated falls short of 3.5 million won, the Plaintiff paid the amount equivalent to such amount.

(excluding value-added tax).

(1) The Plaintiff did not pay rent under the instant lease contract from November 2017.

(2) Defendant B expressed his intent to terminate the instant lease contract on the ground of the unpaid fee payment in the instant counterclaim.

On May 31, 2018, the president was served on the Plaintiff.

(3) On July 31, 2018, the Plaintiff transferred the instant business site to Defendant B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the sales of the experience-based business organization of the instant play Park amounting to KRW 1 billion per year; and (b) the Plaintiff’s assertion was false to enter a large-scale clothing shopping mall.

The Plaintiff believed that the sales of the instant case would be more than KRW 200 million a year at the end of that time, and on the condition that at least KRW 3850,000 per month is paid.

arrow