logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.11.15 2019나2028766
부당이득금 반환청구의 소
Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) shall be attached Form 1 to the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 17, 2017, the Plaintiff agreed to lease the instant real estate from the Defendant, and concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant with the following content:

(hereinafter “Lease Agreement”). Lease deposit from August 16, 2017 to August 15, 2027: 200 million won (Fho Lake 70 million, Dho 40 million,Gho 40 million, Hho 50 million, and Hho 50 million): 11.9 million won (Fho 4.3 million, Dho 2.15 million, Gho 2.1 million, and Hho 350,000) may not be altered, sub-leased or provided as security without the consent of the lessor, nor may it be used for any purpose other than the purpose of lease.

Where a lessee has failed to pay the rent three times or more, or has violated the above provisions, the lessor may terminate the principal contract.

Where a lease contract is terminated, the lessee shall restore the instant real estate to its original state and return it to the lessor, and the lessor shall return the deposit to the lessee.

Monthly rent is a separate amount of value-added tax.

B. The Plaintiff paid a security deposit to the Defendant pursuant to the instant lease agreement, and installed a facility with the delivery of the instant real estate, and operated the KIKO from August 10, 2017.

C. On November 20, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant notice to the effect that “In the absence of any measure, the instant lease agreement shall be automatically terminated” is “The Plaintiff cannot operate a kzae because smells are smelled due to any defect in the cooperative facilities and sewage pipes of the instant real estate.”

Accordingly, the Defendant did not answer, and on December 18, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease contract was terminated on the same ground.

On January 24, 2018, the Defendant: (a) stated to the Plaintiff on January 24, 2018, that “it is impossible to recognize the Plaintiff’s cause attributable to the Plaintiff; (b) accept the exercise of the right to rescission for prompt settlement of disputes and indicate the intention of rescission of agreement.

arrow