1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 19, 2017, the Plaintiff’s representative director C concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 8.4 million, monthly rent of KRW 924,00 (including payment on the 10th day of each month and value added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the lease term from July 20, 2017 to July 19, 2019, with respect to some of 27.62 square meters (hereinafter “the lease object of this case”) out of the two floors of the building indicated in the attached Table as indicated in the attached list between the Defendant and the Defendant.

Around that time, the Defendant received the above lease deposit from C, and transferred the leased object of this case to C.

B. C established the Plaintiff on November 6, 2017. On November 15, 2017, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement on the subject matter of the instant lease with the Defendant on November 15, 2017, and changed the term of lease from November 17, 2017 to November 16, 2019, and the lease deposit, rent, and management fee is added.

The lease agreement is the same as that stated in the port, but C entered into a lease agreement to substitute the Plaintiff’s deposit for the lease deposit (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. On August 7, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that C had malodor in the subject matter of the lease of this case from the time when the lease contract was concluded, and that it did not pay the following amounts to the time before and after the conclusion of the instant lease contract, except for the payment of KRW 622,598, which was settled with the Defendant on August 7, 2017. Accordingly, on May 2, 2018, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff evidentiary mail containing the content that the instant lease was terminated on the ground of the delinquency in rent.

The above content-certified mail reached the Plaintiff around that time.

As the Plaintiff still did not express its intention while occupying and using the leased object of this case despite the termination of the instant lease agreement by the Defendant, the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking the name of the building and the claim for return of unjust enrichment in accordance with the Suwon District Court Decision 2018Kadan5776.