beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. The Defendants are ordered to issue an officetel listed in the attached Form, and the Defendants are ordered to do so;
B. As from March 17, 2016, Defendant C is above.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 16, 2015, the Plaintiff leased an officetel listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “instant officetel”) to Defendant B as KRW 20,000,000 (including value-added tax) for the lease period from March 16, 2015 to March 16, 2016, the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000,000 from March 16, 2016.
(The above lease agreement is referred to as the "instant lease agreement"). B
Defendant C is residing in the instant officetel from the beginning date of the lease term of this case.
[Grounds for recognition] Class A, Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts of the determination as to the request for the order of surrender, the instant lease agreement was terminated on March 16, 2016, and thus, the Defendant B, as a lessee, is obligated to issue an order to the Plaintiff as an occupant without permission to suspend the instant officetel.
B. (1) According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C is obligated to return the benefits accrued therefrom to the Plaintiff, and the scope of the benefits that are to be returned is the amount equivalent to the rent of the instant officetel.
(2) The Plaintiff also sought unjust enrichment or damages equivalent to the rent on the ground of illegal occupation against Defendant B. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that Defendant B occupied and used the instant officetel. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for this portion of the instant officetel is without merit without further review.
(3) Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the rent from March 17, 2016 to March 15, 2016 (the date when the instant lease contract was terminated is sought from March 16, 2016 on the premise that it is March 15, 2016, but the termination date of the instant lease contract is March 16, 2016) to the amount calculated by applying the rate of KRW 1.65 million per month to the instant officetel name.
3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s request for surrender against the Defendants is justified.