beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B from 400 million won to 400 million won, the real estate indicated in the attached real estate list from May 1, 2014.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. (1) On April 23, 2009, the Plaintiff: (a) attached Table 1, 2, 7, 8, and 1 among the real estate listed in the real estate list attached to the real estate list, the Plaintiff leased the part (B) of the store (hereinafter “each of the instant stores”) with the number of points of 9.9174m2 and the number of points of 9.9174m2 and the same map 2, 3, 6, 7, and 2; and (b) the part (C) of the store (hereinafter “the instant store”) with the number of points of 9.9174m2 and the same map 3,4,5,6, and 3m2 connected each point of 9.9174m2 (hereinafter “the size”) to Defendant B from the date of the lease deposit to April 29, 2014.
(2) Defendant B paid a lease deposit to the Plaintiff, and received the delivery of each of the instant stores, and operated a restaurant with the trade name “D” up to now with Defendant C.
[Ground] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 5, 6 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. As the instant lease agreement expired on April 29, 201, which is the expiration date, the Defendants are obligated to deliver each of the instant stores to the Plaintiff.
However, upon the termination of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff is obligated to refund the lease deposit to Defendant B, and the fact that Defendant B did not pay the Plaintiff the monthly rent from May 2014 does not conflict between the parties. As such, Defendant B received the remainder of money calculated by deducting the amount calculated by the rate of KRW 2 million per month from May 1, 2014 to May 1, 2014 from the date of delivery of each of the instant stores from the Plaintiff to the date of delivery of each of the instant stores, and Defendant C is obligated to deliver each of the instant stores to the Plaintiff, and Defendant C is obligated to deliver each of the instant stores to the Plaintiff.
2. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is accepted as reasonable.