beta
Text
1. Of the real estate strata 60.44 square meters listed in the separate sheet, each point of Annex 1, 2, 4, 2, and 1 shall be in order.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 20, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant on the terms that the Plaintiff leases the instant lease building KRW 20 million (hereinafter “the instant deposit”) to the Defendant on the condition that the lease deposit amount is KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 200,000,000, and the lease agreement period is two years from March 16, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”).
B. The Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to refuse to renew the instant lease agreement to the Defendant on or around December 2015, which constitutes the period from six months to one month before the expiration date of the instant lease agreement. Accordingly, the instant lease agreement was terminated on March 15, 2016, which is the expiration date of the said lease agreement.
C. However, the Defendant continued to possess and use the instant leased building without paying an amount equivalent to monthly rent from March 16, 2016, the day following the expiration date of the instant lease agreement, until then.
On the other hand, Nonparty C, a creditor of the Defendant, filed an application for provisional seizure of the claim against the Defendant as the obligor, the Plaintiff as the garnishee, and the decision of acceptance on July 2014.
(Court 2014Kadan4248). 【Ground for Recognition】 A without dispute, entry in Gap 1, 2, 3-1, 3-2, and 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the defendant is obligated to deliver the leased building of this case to the plaintiff simultaneously with receiving the remaining money from the plaintiff after deducting the amount calculated by the rate of KRW 200,000,000 per month, which is the unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent from March 16, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the building of this case, from March 16, 2016.
In this regard, the defendant is due to the defect of the leased building of this case.