beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 36,743,810 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its related amount from May 1, 2018 to November 27, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 6, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the lease deposit amount of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 280,000,000 from January 20 to January 19, 2019 to the Defendant of the first floor public bath and underground boiler room (hereinafter “instant public bath”) among the building Nam-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant public bath”), and the Plaintiff set up two air boilers in the instant public bath to the end of the period from January 20, 2017 to January 19.
B. After the delivery of a bath, the Plaintiff installed two air boilers on the instant real estate. The Defendant paid 100 million won to the Plaintiff by January 20, 2017, and operated the instant bath upon delivery from around that time.
C. (1) On February 2017, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to terminate the instant lease agreement.
After that, on February 3, 2017, D, the spouse of the Plaintiff, placed a cashier's check of KRW 38,000,000 at the instant bath.
(2) On February 7, 2017, the Defendant reported the closure of the bath business at the location of the instant bath business, and delivered the instant bath to the Plaintiff around that time.
(3) On March 15, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the instant bath to a third party; and on March 23, 2017, the Plaintiff returned KRW 20 million out of the lease deposit to the Defendant.
C. On the other hand, D embezzled the instant cashier’s checks, which had been placed on the instant bath on February 3, 2017, by bringing the Defendant to the main bath.
“The Defendant filed a complaint on suspicion of suspicion, etc., and the Defendant was suspected of having received a non-prosecution disposition by a public prosecutor.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, entries in Eul evidence 1 through 5, purport of whole pleadings]
2. The assertion and judgment
A. (1) The Plaintiff (the Plaintiff)’s assertion (A) imposed the total amount of electricity charges of KRW 2,207,860, the water supply and sewerage charges of KRW 830,200, the gas charges of KRW 81,930, while the Defendant’s business was in the bath of this case, and during the same period.