beta
Text
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
A. Of the one-story 307.7 square meters of a building listed in the attached list, the attached drawing indication A, B, C, D, and d.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 1, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant order No. 1-A
The lease deposit amount of KRW 12,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,100,000, monthly general management expenses of KRW 78,000, monthly general management expenses of KRW 78,00, and lease period of KRW 2 years for the stores listed in paragraph (1) (hereinafter “instant store”), and the contract was concluded to collect value-added tax, electricity charges, water charges, etc. separately.
(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.
However, from May 1, 2013 to September 15, 2014, the Defendant did not pay KRW 19,435,310, including rents and public charges, and the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the ground that the monthly rent for at least two years was overdue on September 15, 2014.
C. Meanwhile, monthly rent, management expenses, public charges, etc. to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff every month are KRW 1,386,100 in total.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, since the instant lease contract was terminated by the Plaintiff’s notice of termination on the ground of the Defendant’s delinquency in payment of monthly rent, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff, and pay the Plaintiff the amount calculated by the rate of KRW 1,386,10 per month as unjust enrichment and management expenses equivalent to the rent from September 16, 2014 to September 16, 2014, as the monthly rent and public charges in arrears, and the monthly rent and public charges from September 16, 2014.
B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that the termination of the Plaintiff’s contract is unlawful on the grounds that the Plaintiff did not have the obligation to pay monthly rent for the pertinent period, since the Plaintiff did not have the obligation to pay monthly rent to the Plaintiff, since the construction of a church was carried out on the neighboring land of the instant store from May 2013 to August 2014.
The Defendant is only the video of the evidence Nos. 1 to 4, the evidence Nos. 1 to 1, and the evidence Nos. 2.