beta
Text
1. The defendant
(a) From July 20, 2019 to July 20, 2019, KRW 107,830,381 as well as KRW 95,480,00 among them.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The plaintiff is a company running real estate leasing business, etc., and the defendant is a company running a spawru manufacturing business.
B. On May 2, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) leased deposit deposit amounting to KRW 50,000,000; (b) lease deposit amounting to KRW 16% of the net sales (minimum rent of KRW 7,00,000; (c) late payment of late payment; and (d) lease period of KRW 12 months from the Defendant’s business commencement date; and (e) lease period of KRW 12 months from the Defendant’s business commencement date.
C. On July 22, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease contract extended only the term of lease to August 31, 2020 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) with respect to the instant store by the terms and conditions of the previous lease contract, and agreed to reduce the lease period by KRW 6.3 million per month from December 1, 2016 to November 30, 2017 on two occasions.
From the end of July 2018, the Defendant discontinued the business of the instant store from the end of the day to June 2018, and did not pay as from June 19, 2018. The sum of unpaid rents until July 19, 2019 and the arrears of 2% of the monthly rent is KRW 107,830,381 (i.e., unpaid principal interest of KRW 95,480,00 in overdue interest of KRW 12,350,381).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the parties concerned claim the payment of the rent to the Defendant by the end of the lease term under the instant lease agreement.
In regard to this, the Defendant paid a difference between the market price and the surrounding area without properly forecasting the business district at the time of concluding the instant lease agreement. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff intended to liquidate the contractual relationship at around July 2018, but did not yield the amount of the payment with only the phrase of the contract, when the Defendant closed the instant store.