1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

1. Following the conclusion of the judgment subject to a retrial is apparent or clearly recorded in this court. A.

The plaintiff in Busan District Court Decision 201Gapo245604, the court of first instance filed a lawsuit against the defendant against Busan District Court 201Gapo245604, "1,400,000 won for unpaid rent and 1,400,000 won for late payment," and the above court rendered on June 19, 2012, "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 990,000 won and 5% per annum from July 5, 2011 to June 19, 2012, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment (hereinafter "the first instance judgment"), and the main reasons are as follows.

The Defendant’s failure to pay the instant lease agreement is 900,000 won, and there is no dispute between the parties.

The agreement on damages for delay in this case constitutes the provision of penalty in preparation for a case where the defendant delays the payment of the monthly rent, and the penalty is presumed to be the liquidated damages pursuant to Article 398(4) of the Civil Act.

The court may reduce the liquidated damages in an unreasonably excessive manner. In light of the economic status of the Plaintiff and the Defendant indicated in the argument of the instant case, the motive behind the liquidated damages, the ratio of estimated damages, the amount of estimated damages, the transaction practices at the time of the instant lease agreement, and the social norms, etc., it is reasonable to reduce the liquidated damages by 10% for the total amount of overdue rents.

Therefore, damages for delay to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff is KRW 90,000 ( KRW 900,000 x 10%).

B. The plaintiff of the appellate court judgment of Busan District Court 2012Na12259 appealed against the judgment of the first instance court of this case. However, the appellate court of Busan District Court (Seoul District Court 2012Na12259) stated that " October 19, 2012" is a part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.