beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 50,398,530 and KRW 50,00,00 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 50,39,530 from April 17, 2019, and KRW 398,530.
Reasons
1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be recognized by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1-4 and Eul evidence No. 2.
On February 2, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract between the Defendant and the Defendant for lease of D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with a deposit of KRW 50,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 800,000, and the period from February 27, 2017 to February 27, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and received a deposit of KRW 50,00,000 from the Defendant around February 27, 2017.
B. On January 21, 2019, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of his/her intent to renew the instant lease agreement, but again, on January 31, 2019, notified the Defendant of his/her intention to not wish to renew the instant lease agreement on the ground that the Defendant did not take necessary measures, such as repairing the instant real estate, even though the leakage of the instant real estate was incurred as a toilet stream for the next floor FF household, on the instant real estate, and then, notified the Defendant on March 17, 2019 of his/her intention to withdraw from the instant real estate, and on April 16, 2019, notified the Defendant of the password of the locking device of the instant real estate.
C. Meanwhile, while occupying and using the instant real estate, the Plaintiff paid KRW 398,530 with the long-term repair appropriations from February 27, 2017 to March 17, 2019.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the parties’ assertion (1) The Plaintiff’s instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on February 27, 2019 upon the Plaintiff’s notice of rejection of renewal, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to refund KRW 50,000,000 to the Plaintiff and pay KRW 398,530 to the Plaintiff for the long-term repair appropriations.
In addition, since the defendant did not take necessary measures on the water leakage generated from the real estate of this case and delayed so that the plaintiff suffered a lot of inconvenience, it shall be compensated for this.