Whether Article 11 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act applies to cases where a contract is renewed after termination of the lease contract or a rent is increased by agreement between the parties before the termination of the lease contract (negative)

In Article 11(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the parties concerned may request an increase or decrease in the rent or deposit in the future in cases where the rent or deposit has become unreasonable due to taxes, public charges, and other burdens on the leased building, or changes in the economic situation. However, in cases of an increase, it shall not exceed the ratio set in accordance with the standards prescribed by Presidential Decree." Article 11(2) of the same Act provides that "An increase in the rent or deposit under paragraph (1) shall not exceed one year after the lease contract or the agreed increase in the rent, etc. shall not be made within one year after the lease contract or the agreed increase in the rent, etc." This provision applies only to cases where one of the parties concerned requests an increase or decrease in the rent, etc. as agreed upon during the existence of the lease contract. This provision does not apply to cases where the lease contract is renewed after

Article 11 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act

Plaintiff

Defendant (Law Firm Boo-In International, Attorney Jeong Jae-sik, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012Na54712 Decided September 27, 2013

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. Article 11(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act provides that "if the rent or deposit has become unreasonable due to taxes, public charges and other burdens on the leased building, or changes in economic conditions, the parties concerned may request an increase or decrease in the rent or deposit in the future. However, in the case of an increase, it shall not exceed the rate set according to the standards set by Presidential Decree." Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that "An increase in the rent or deposit under Paragraph (1) shall not exceed one year after the lease contract or the agreed increase in the rent, etc. shall not be made within one year after the lease contract or the agreed increase in the rent, etc. is requested by one of the parties concerned during the existence of the lease contract, it shall not apply.

2. For the same purport, in this case where the Plaintiff and the Defendant increased the rent of this case by an agreement while concluding a lease agreement again, the application of Article 11 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act shall be excluded, and it is justifiable to reject the Defendant’s assertion that the termination of the lease agreement of this case on the ground of overdue rent was not legitimate since the Defendant paid the rent in excess of the increased limit as set forth in the above provision, namely, the Defendant paid the rent in excess of the increased limit, and there was no error by misapprehending the legal principles on Article

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Poe-young (Presiding Justice)