beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 135,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 29, 2017 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. (1) On July 15, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, and the Defendant’s wife among the third floor buildings of Busan Southern-gu, Busan-gu, and D, the Defendant’s wife, from March 2016, operated as the president from March 1, 2016 (hereinafter “instant childcare center”).
(1) As to the instant lease agreement with respect to KRW 130,00,000, KRW 1,200,000 per month of rent, and the period from September 1, 2016 to August 31, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
(2) The Plaintiff concluded a contract. From July 15, 2016 to August 31, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 130,000 to the Defendant, and paid KRW 5,000,000 to the Defendant as the facility user fee of the instant childcare center (the facility user fee was returned upon termination of the instant lease contract), and on August 31, 2016, at the F Licensed Real Estate Agent Office that arranged the instant lease contract, the Plaintiff received the instant childcare center passbook and the USB where the Defendant’s authorized certificate was stored. From September 1, 2016, the Plaintiff provided the school vehicles owned by the Plaintiff to the childcare center to transport the original children.
B. 1) At the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, the Defendant would have established a right to lease on a deposit basis for the Plaintiff at the time of entering into the instant lease agreement to guarantee the return of the deposit, and the Plaintiff would have to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis for the instant childcare center to secure the return of the deposit. The Plaintiff’s parents did not raise any objection or issue with respect to the operation of the childcare center, and the instant childcare center’s account books and documents are all kept. (2) However, the Defendant did not make a provisional registration on a pre-sale basis, instead of establishing a right to lease on a deposit basis, but did not make a provisional registration on a pre-sale basis. G that was employed by the Plaintiff as the principal of the childcare center from September 1, 2016 to the instant case.