beta
Text
Defendant B with respect to a claim for monetary payment exceeding the amount ordered under the judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Since Defendant B did not pay the rent for more than three years, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease contract by serving a duplicate of the complaint of this case, and Defendant C currently illegally occupied the instant real estate.
Therefore, the Defendants are jointly obligated to deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and jointly and severally pay the unpaid rent of KRW 70,000 from May 1, 2017 to November 30, 2018, and the amount of unjust enrichment of KRW 380,000 per month from December 1, 2018 to December 1, 2018.
3. Determination
A. According to the facts of the determination as to the claim against Defendant B 1 on the termination of the instant lease agreement and the determination as to the claim for delivery, Defendant B was in arrears for at least three months since January 31, 2019, and the fact that the duplicate of the complaint of this case, on September 17, 2019, stating that the instant lease agreement was terminated on the grounds of the unpaid rent, was delivered to Defendant B on September 17, 2019, is apparent in the record.
Therefore, the instant lease contract was lawfully terminated on September 17, 2019 with the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to terminate the contract.
As to this, Defendant B asserted that the rent shall be paid at the end of the pertinent period, and that the Plaintiff is not a delinquent vehicle, as the Plaintiff agreed on March 7, 2017 to exempt the Plaintiff from the liability for arbitrarily cutting off or cutting off the instant real estate from the liability for five months, following the conclusion of the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff on May 1, 2017.
According to the records of evidence No. 1-2, the plaintiff and defendant B can recognize the fact that they agreed to give and receive in advance the tea of the instant lease agreement. The plaintiff and defendant B are No. 1 and No. 1.