logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
대전지방법원 2019.07.04 2018가단8382
청구이의
Text

1. The Defendant’s payment of money to the Plaintiff in the Daejeon District Court Decision 2017Da18504 Decided December 14, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 25, 2016, the Plaintiff leased 30 square meters of a 1st floor store (hereinafter “instant store”) among the Seo-gu Daejeon building, Seo-gu, Daejeon, which is owned by the Defendant, from the Defendant, for the period from March 18, 2016 to March 17, 2018, the lease deposit amount of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 460,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 460,000 from March 18, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). The Plaintiff received delivery of the instant store from the Defendant around that time by paying the lease deposit to the Defendant.

B. On July 28, 2017, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant lease contract was terminated, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of unjust enrichment equivalent to the delivery, overdue rent, and rent ( Daejeon District Court Decision 2017Da18504) and filed on December 14, 2017, stating that “the Plaintiff shall deliver the instant store to the Defendant, and KRW 3220,00 (the rent from December 19, 2016 to July 18, 2017) and KRW 3220,00 (the rent from July 19, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the instant store” (hereinafter referred to as “instant judgment”), and that the judgment against the Plaintiff was finalized at the time of the instant judgment by the Defendant’s monetary claim against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the monetary claim against the Plaintiff”).

C. On October 16, 2017, the Plaintiff sent text messages to the effect that the Plaintiff’s goods were removed from the instant store, and that it was difficult for the Defendant’s husband to hold a store on October 17, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. On October 17, 2017, as the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff transferred the instant store to the Defendant.

Upon the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, the Plaintiff’s right to claim the return of the lease deposit amounting to five million won against the Defendant as the automatic claim against the Defendant. From December 19, 2016 to October 17, 2017, the Plaintiff’s overdue loan amounting to four million won against the Defendant.

arrow