beta
Text
The defendant's KRW 69,150,000 for the plaintiff and its 5% per annum from May 29, 2020 to November 13, 2020.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On March 14, 2018, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff providing the Plaintiff with a lease deposit of KRW 130,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 13,750,000 (including value-added tax) and the lease deposit of KRW 13,750,000 (including value-added tax) during the lease period from August 10, 2018 to August 10, 2020, under which the term “facilities are leased under the present conditions of contract” (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the term “a lease agreement”). The Defendant paid the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 13,00,000 on the date of the contract as the lease deposit, and the remainder of KRW 117,00,000 on August 10, 2018.
B. The Defendant, a company running the liquor wholesale business, concluded the instant lease contract with the purpose of using the leased object of this case as the liquor warehouse and the cargo parking lot for transportation of alcoholic beverages.
However, the access road width of the leased object was narrow when the cargo vehicle owned by the defendant enters.
Accordingly, the leased object of this case was not used as the defendant's liquor warehouse and parking lot because the cargo car owned by the defendant was not allowed to enter.
From January 10, 2019, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the rent under the instant lease agreement.
C. At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, other liquor wholesalers were leased from the Plaintiff to use the leased object as a liquor warehouse and parking lot, but the lessee was using freight cars that could have access to the said access road.
The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the return of the lease deposit on the premise of the cancellation of the instant lease agreement due to mistake by Seoul Central District Court Decision 2019Da507190, or the cancellation of the instant lease agreement on the ground of nonperformance of the Plaintiff’s duty to use and benefit from the lease. The above court rendered a ruling of dismissal of the claim on May 8, 2020, and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
The reasons for the judgment are as follows.