beta
Text
1. The defendant
A. At the same time, the Plaintiff received KRW 2.2 million from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, the real estate indicated in the attached Table.
Reasons
1. On April 26, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a contract between the Defendant and the Defendant to lease the instant real estate with a deposit of KRW 3 million, KRW 1.8 million per annum (payment in April every year), and the period from April 26, 2011 to April 12 each year (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). The Plaintiff received the said deposit from the Defendant. The fact that the Defendant occupied the instant real estate as of the closing date of pleadings, and the fact that the Defendant was using the instant real estate as of the closing date of pleadings, does not conflict between the parties, or is recognized by the statements in subparagraphs A and 2, respectively.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the two-year rent of KRW 2.6 million out of the two-year rent of KRW 3.6 million from April 26, 2013 to April 25, 2015 under the instant lease agreement (it is apparent that the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s mistake, even from April 27, 2013 to April 26, 2015).
Therefore, since the lease contract of this case is terminated by the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, the defendant shall deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff, and shall pay the above overdue charge and the money calculated by the rate of KRW 150,000 per month from April 26, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the real estate as unjust enrichment
B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion does not mean that the rent from April 26, 2013 to April 25, 2014 was paid to the Plaintiff, and the rent from arrears after April 26, 2014 is merely KRW 80,000,000, and the Plaintiff agreed to deduct the rent from the deposit. As such, the instant lease contract cannot be terminated on the grounds of the overdue payment.
3. We examine the judgment. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff a total of KRW 1.8 million from April 26, 2013 to April 25, 2014, and there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant agreed with the Plaintiff to deduct the rent of KRW 800,000 from the deposit money, and this part of the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.
Therefore, the above facts are examined.