logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.11.23 2017가단144131
임대보증금반환
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,200,658 to the Plaintiffs, as well as 5% per annum from September 22, 2017 to November 23, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 3, 2015, the Plaintiffs decided to increase the lease deposit amount of KRW 200 million, monthly rent of KRW 12 million (excluding value-added tax, January 1, 2016), and KRW 300,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 200,000,000, as to the nine floors of the building E (hereinafter “instant store”) from the Defendant for the purpose of operating a postnatal care center.

From November 30 to 60, 2015, a lease contract was concluded with the terms of lease.

1) Under the above lease agreement, various costs of transportation and environment arising in relation to the plaintiffs' business, type of business, etc. were borne by the plaintiffs, and the lease deposit amount of KRW 100,000 and KRW 3,000 were determined to increase the rent for the vehicle in 25 months. 2) The previous tenant was in the state of having illegally installed a 14th of the 20 mother bank, among the 20 mother bank, while operating a postnatal care center, and the fact of the violation was registered as of July 11, 2013 in the building management ledger.

3) According to the above lease agreement, the Plaintiffs paid KRW 200 million to the Defendant under the lease agreement, and the Plaintiff completed business registration on January 25, 2016, and commenced postnatal care centers after completing business registration. (B) Meanwhile, on November 3, 2015, Plaintiff B operated the car page between the Defendant and the Defendant as of November 3, 2015, separately from the lease agreement on the instant store.

A lease contract was concluded with the content that the lease deposit is KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 2 million, and the period from November 30, 2015 to 60 months.

C. However, around August 2016, the Defendant came to know that the charge for compelling the performance of the cost of KRW 40 million was imposed on the illegal double-story structure of the instant store from the competent Gu office, and on October 2017 after the Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff, the construction of closing the two double-storys from the mother bank around October 2017, and the construction of closing the 12 double-storys from the rest of the mother bank around January 2017.

arrow