beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. On June 29, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount to KRW 100 million, and from June 29, 2012 to June 18, 2014, the lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount to KRW 100 million, and the lease term to KRW 100 million.
The Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the aim of subleting the instant building to a third party, and the Defendant also consented to sublet the instant building to a third party upon knowing the same purpose at the time of entering into the lease agreement. As such, the Defendant is obligated not to interfere with the Plaintiff’s subleting business.
However, from the end of November 2012, the Defendant obstructed the entry of the sub-lessees of the instant building from the end of November, 2012, notified that the Defendant did not consent to sub-lease to the competent authority so that the sub-lessees are unable to conduct business registration for the business of the instant building, or proposed that the sub-lessees pay the rent directly to the Defendant, or that the sub-lessees would make a direct lease contract with the Defendant.
Therefore, since the plaintiff terminated the above lease contract on the ground of the defendant's default, the defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit to the plaintiff.
In addition, the Plaintiff: (a) performed interior works to repair defects in the building of this case in KRW 100 million; and (b) carried out electrical shipbuilding works in KRW 1,567,500. This constitutes necessary expenses or beneficial expenses; and (c) the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 101,567,500 paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff in accordance with Article 626 of the Civil Act.
B. The party who entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant is an unincorporated association of “G” rather than the Defendant. The Plaintiff’s lawsuit seeking a lease deposit against the Defendant, who is not the party to the contract, is not a party to the contract.