beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from November 23, 2016 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 12, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease 100 million won on a deposit basis, monthly rent of KRW 4.8 million, and from November 11, 2016 to November 2018, the Plaintiff paid the down payment of KRW 10 million (including KRW 5 million paid in the amount of provisional contract) to the Defendant, and paid the remainder deposit of KRW 90 million up to October 12, 2016.
B. In the event that the lease contract is terminated at the time of the conclusion of the above lease contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to restore the above real estate to its original state and return it to the lessor (Article 5), and upon a special agreement, the Plaintiff may commence the interior construction after paying the remainder of the deposit on October 12, 2016.
The interior interior interior interior interior of the building was able to perform artificial works when it is possible to restore the original state of the signboard and external appearance, and it was decided after the building owner and the location.
C. On October 12, 2016, the Plaintiff planned to set up a sales store for the import of the instant building, and the construction business operator D, who is in charge of interior works, tried to start interior works with metal and to construct them by a exposed concrete method that treats the existing representative outside the instant building with concrete strawings, but did not lead to mind, while the Defendant displayed the appearance of the neighboring building on October 13, 2016, and told D to the effect that such an appearance is in mind.
The plaintiff, who had been staying in Japan at the time, shown the design for the external execution to the defendant through the employees of the real estate brokerage company, but D continues to oppose the defendant, judged that the progress of construction could no longer be completed until November 15, 2016, which was the construction period originally planned, and waived the construction work on October 19, 2016.
E. Since then, the Plaintiff on October 25, 2016.