beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the part of "1. Recognizing facts" as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant completed the instant construction by May 7, 2014 and failed to comply with the obligation to deliver the instant house to the Plaintiff. In the event that the Plaintiff was unable to perform the said obligation by June 7, 2014, the Defendant notified the Defendant of the cancellation of each of the instant lease agreements as of June 8, 2014, but failed to perform it by June 7, 2014, and thus, the instant lease agreement was revoked on June 8, 2014 by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to cancel the said suspension condition.
B) The Defendant, without permission, performed the instant construction project that removes walls between 300 and 301 without permission, and received a disposition of enforcement fines from the Yongsan-gu Office. At the time of the execution of the instant construction project, the Defendant failed to perform its duty to deliver the leased object to the lessee under the condition that the leased object can be used or profit from. The Defendant is obliged to restore the leased object to its original state, such as re-construction of the wall removed in response to the disposition of enforcement fines and removal of the illegally extended part without permission. Therefore, the obligation according to each of the instant lease agreements that the Defendant agreed to deliver to the lessee for use as one house is impossible. The Plaintiff may rescind each of the instant lease agreements on the grounds of nonperformance of the Defendant regardless of the performance and provision of the remainder. Thus, each of the instant lease agreements was revoked upon the Plaintiff’s declaration of intention of cancellation on June 8, 2014 (the cancellation of each of the lease agreements).