beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, as Defendant C, KRW 18,000,00,000, and each of them from March 7, 2019 to May 13, 2020.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The 2nd floor building located D in Defendant B, if the building was owned by Defendant B (hereinafter “instant building”) is registered as a entertainment restaurant, and the 2nd floor is registered as a house, respectively. The 1st floor is divided into two floors and composed of two floors.
B. From September 2013, Defendant C registered his/her business as a retail business and operated a camera on the first floor (the first floor and the second floor; hereinafter “instant store”) of the instant building. On September 1, 2018, between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, who reported the instant store’s introduction into the second floor car page, entered into a contract for transfer and acquisition of the purchase price at KRW 18 million for the title house at the instant store (hereinafter “instant premium contract”) and received KRW 5 million for the down payment per contract date from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant premium contract”), and received KRW 13 million for the remainder around September 4, 2018.
C. Around that time, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant C by setting the lease deposit of KRW 20,000,000 won for the instant store, monthly rent of KRW 1.1 million (three months in advance), and the lease period from October 20, 2018 to October 20, 2021, and paid KRW 20,000,000 to Defendant B on September 4, 2018, and paid KRW 3.3 million monthly rent of October 23, 2018.
From October 1, 2018, the Plaintiff: (a) performed the interior work for the instant store; (b) registered the business as a general restaurant to operate the business after the completion of the construction; (c) in the process, the competent administrative agency, race-si, which became aware of the fact that the instant store is being used as a double floor without receiving the building report; (d) the Plaintiff’s business registration was returned; and (e) on December 11, 2018 and January 14, 2019, the race-si ordered Defendant B to restore the instant store to its original state.
[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.