beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) raised in the trial.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On February 9, 2011, Defendant B leased the instant real estate as of March 1, 201, by setting the deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,000,000, and the lease term from March 1, 2011.
Defendant C and Defendant D, who is a dependent of Defendant B, have registered the business in the name of Defendant B and operated the restaurant in the name of “F” from around that time.
B. On March 24, 2013, the Plaintiff purchased the entire building including the instant real estate from E, and the Plaintiff succeeded to the lessor status of the said lease agreement between E and E, agreed to recognize the said lease agreement for five years from the date of commencing the said lease, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the said building on June 4, 2013.
C. As to the above monthly rent, Defendant B agreed to raise the rent of KRW 1,100,00 from June 10, 2013 to June 2013, and KRW 1,210,000 from June 2014 to June 2014, and paid the Plaintiff the relevant rent.
On May 18, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants that the instant real estate should be returned from March 1, 2016 to February 29, 2016, and notified the Defendants that their monthly rent would be increased by KRW 1,310,000 from June 2015.
Accordingly, on June 4, 2015, Defendant C found the Plaintiff, who was taking lessons at the time of the Plaintiff’s operation as “G English Private Teaching Institutes” located on the third floor of the above building on the third floor, and, if the Plaintiff’s mother, H was unable to receive a security deposit, the Plaintiff’s mother, her mother, and her mother died and died, her husband, her husband, her husband, her husband, her husband, her husband, and her husband, her husband, her husband, her husband, and her husband, her husband, and her husband, her husband, and her husband, her husband, and her husband, and her husband, she called “Amoph, an organization of violence in his/her territory,” and the Plaintiff’s private teaching institutes during learning are able to keep.