beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation as to this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for adding the following judgments, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant sub-lease contract had already been transferred to E around June 10, 2015, and the parties who concluded the instant sub-lease contract with the Plaintiff are not the Defendant but E, so the Defendant is not liable to refund the sub-lease deposit to the Plaintiff. If the Defendant and E were to be in a partnership business relationship at the time of the conclusion of the instant sub-lease contract, the Defendant is liable to return the sub-lease deposit to the Plaintiff as one of its members only one-half.
B. In full view of the facts stated in Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 8 (including the provisional number), and Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 6, the entire arguments are as follows: ① The sub-lease contract of this case made between the plaintiff and the defendant contains a fixed date seal and a chassis; on the other hand, the sub-lease contract made between the plaintiff and the defendant does not include the rent, and there is no special agreement that "if the business operator is changed, the contract shall be succeeded as above." The monthly rent shall be agreed upon." ② The plaintiff remitted KRW 10 million out of the deposit under the sub-lease contract of this case to the account under the name of the defendant; ② The plaintiff did not pay the defendant the amount of the transfer of the business, the right of lease, etc.; ③ The plaintiff did not receive the settlement, etc. with the defendant when the operation of the DM is omitted; ④ the defendant transferred the DM after September 20, 2015 to the F, and the defendant has received the changed rent under the name of the defendant.