beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B indicated in the attached Form No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, among the 489 square meters of Gangseo-si D Miscellaneous land.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On October 19, 2005, the network E leased Defendant B a lease of KRW 489 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) with a lease term of KRW 5 years and a rent of KRW 4.5 million per annum.
B. Defendant B owned a building on the ground surface (hereinafter “instant building”) on the instant land, which connects each point of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 5 of the attached drawings on the instant land in sequence, and Defendant C leased and occupied the instant building from Defendant B.
C. Defendant B did not pay the instant land after paying only KRW 4.5 million in 2005 and KRW 2 million in 2006 as the rent for the instant land.
E As a result of the death of August 29, 2009, the Plaintiff, a ASEAN, succeeded to 2/11 shares of the instant land.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 (including paper numbers), Eul 1, Eul 1, Eul 2, the result of this court's request for surveying and appraising the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The plaintiff asserts that the above lease contract was terminated around that time due to the cancellation of the lease contract on the land of this case, the removal of the building of this case and the transfer of the land from the deceased E's heir due to the delay in rent to the defendant B during the second half of 2009. However, there is no evidence to prove that the deceased E's heir notified the termination of the above lease contract during the second half of 2009. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
B. The Plaintiff asserts, as the preparatory brief dated May 31, 2018, that it should be notified of the termination of the lease agreement. The Plaintiff’s notification of the termination of the said lease agreement with the preparatory brief dated May 31, 2018, and the said preparatory document was delivered to Defendant B on May 31, 2018. Thus, according to the above facts of recognition, it is apparent that the said preparatory document was delivered to Defendant B.