beta
Text
1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. The Defendant (Counterclaim) shall, upon the claim added by this Court, file a claim.
Reasons
1. Grounds for a judgment of this court which cited the judgment of the first instance, and "Article 2-2" in the judgment of the first instance;
C. The scope of the obligation to return unjust enrichment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the portion of the obligation to return unjust enrichment is dismissed as follows, and thus, it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4
[Supplementary Use]
C. 1) As to the amount of unjust enrichment that the Defendant is obligated to return, the amount of the Defendant’s unjust enrichment is deemed to be equivalent to KRW 6,500,00 per annum, which is the rent for the instant store after the termination of the instant lease contract. As such, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 541,00 (6,50,000 x 1/12, and less than 000 as the Plaintiff seeks) as unjust enrichment from the use of the instant store (i.e., “the Defendant was unable to use the two floors among the instant stores from 2014 due to the lack of repair of defective defects, such as pipeline leakage, etc.” However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant was unable to use the entire two floors of the instant store from the relevant time due to the Plaintiff’s fault on the part of the lessor.
(2) Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment of KRW 41,00 (the amount obtained by deducting KRW 500,000 from the lease deposit of this case) out of the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of January 2016, which is the month following the termination of the instant lease contract, and the amount of unjust enrichment calculated by applying the rate of KRW 541,00 per month from the following month. (2) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff a sum of KRW 174,580 (electric charge of KRW 170,640) out of the electricity and water supply fees of the instant store that the Defendant had to pay at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease contract on October 2017, according to the purport of each entry and all pleadings set forth in subparagraphs A and 13,14.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 174,580 won equivalent to the above overdue electricity charges, etc. to the plaintiff.
3. Ultimately, the defendant on 215.