beta
Text
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
(a) Of the buildings listed in the annex 1 list, each point of Annex 2 Map 1, 2, 3, 4 and 1.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
A. On January 14, 2014, the Plaintiff, among the buildings listed in the attached Table 1 list, leased to the Defendant a part of 54.45 square meters (501; hereinafter “instant store”) on the ship connected in sequences 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, and 54.45 square meters (501; hereinafter “instant store”) among the buildings listed in the attached Table 1 list, as the period from January 14, 2014 to January 13, 2016; two million won of the deposit; and 2.60,000 won of the rent month (in advance on each 14th day).
(hereinafter “instant lease contract”). The Defendant is occupying the store of this case from around that time to that day.
(B) The instant lease agreement appears to have been renewed once.
From January 14, 2014 to December 13, 2016, the Defendant unpaid for 17 months out of total of 35 months, and in particular, did not pay the tea once for 2016.
C. On November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail stating that the instant lease contract is terminated on the grounds of delinquency in rent, and the said content-certified mail was sent to the Defendant around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Fact-finding without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 10, and the purport of the entire pleadings are as follows. Since the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated by the plaintiff due to the defendant's delinquency in rent, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the amount of the rent of 4,420,000 won (=260,000 won x 17 months x 260,000 won) for the period from December 14, 2016 to December 13, 2016.
In addition to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 22,300,00 for the overdue electricity for three months, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this, and the claim for this portion is not accepted.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.