beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 23, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) determined the lease deposit of KRW 228.47 square meters on the first floor of the C&D structure 228.47 square meters in Jeonnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun, as the lease deposit; (b) KRW 500,000,000 per month; and (c) on August 1, 2016, the lease period is determined; (d) KRW 70%, Defendant 30%, Defendant 30%, expenses for the purification of sewage; (e) the expenses for the repair or exchange of ground water, and the expenses for the repair or exchange of ground water, to the Defendant at the rate of KRW 50%, respectively, and (e) paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant at the same time, and (e) thereafter, was engaged in restaurant business in the same place as D.
B. On July 30, 2016, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement again (hereinafter “second lease agreement”) by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 700,000,000 per month, and by August 1, 2018, and agreed that the costs of purifying sewage and the costs of repairing groundwater and the costs of repairing groundwater and exchanging groundwater shall be borne by the Defendant respectively.
C. The Plaintiff’s suspension of restaurant business from January 2018, but the term of lease expires. The Defendant leased the above building to E on September 17, 2018. The Plaintiff ordered the Defendant to order the above building on October 2018. The Plaintiff, up to that time, did not demand the Defendant to share the costs of sewage purification, or paid the Defendant the charges for electricity for underground water storage.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff, at the time of the conclusion of the first lease contract, agreed to ensure that the plaintiff was given an opportunity to recover the premium to a new lessee after the expiration of the lease period, the defendant arbitrarily concluded a lease contract with a new lessee and obstructed the collection of the plaintiff's premium, or prevented the defendant from recovering the premium in violation of Article 10-4 (1) 4 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.