beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. On December 30, 2015, the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit basis with the term of December 30, 2015, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million, and December 30, 2017. On February 29, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 150 million to the Defendant, including the deposit deposit amount of KRW 50 million.
Since the plaintiff ordered the defendant to order the building of this case after the lease term expires, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the above lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million and delay damages.
2. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 13, the defendant, at the time of February 29, 2016, could recognize the fact that Eul, a representative director of the plaintiff, transferred the money of KRW 150 million to the plaintiff's account with the representative director's account (hereinafter "the money of this case").
However, the evidence No. 1 cannot be admitted as evidence because there is no evidence to prove the authenticity, and the following circumstances, which can be recognized by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 3 and No. 4 and No. 6 (including the paper number), namely, the Plaintiff’s representative director D’s transfer on December 21, 2015, appears to be a down payment out of the transfer price, and the Plaintiff asserted that the above KRW 50 million was a lease deposit for the building of this case at the first instance trial, and the Plaintiff claimed that KRW 50 million out of the instant money was a lease deposit for the building of this case, not the above KRW 50 million at the first instance trial, and in the Daegu District Court Decision 2016Ga20501, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the above KRW 150 million was a transfer price for the building of this case, and the remainder of the Plaintiff’s claim that KRW 500 million was a transfer price for the building of this case and KRW 3500,000,00,00.