logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2020.07.08 2018가단69991
임대차보증금
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is simultaneously paid KRW 30,838,710 from the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

Reasons

1. On April 14, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the lease of KRW 50,000,000, and KRW 3,000,00 for the monthly rent from May 4, 2018 to May 3, 2020 (excluding value-added tax) with respect to the two-story 194 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”).

In the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant determined that the lessor could terminate the contract, “if the lessee delays to pay the rent for a period of three years, the lessor may terminate the contract.”

By May 4, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the lease deposit of KRW 50,00,000 and the rent of KRW 3,300,00 (the amount that occurred from May 4, 2018 to June 3, 2018) and operated the restaurant from May 10, 2018 after receiving delivery of the instant store from the Defendant and performing internal interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior construction work.

On June 12, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,300,000 to the Defendant on rent, KRW 3,300,000 on July 11, 2018, KRW 23,000,000 on October 23, 2018, and KRW 3,600,00 on October 30, 2018 (the amount that occurs from June 4, 2018 to October 3, 2018).

The Plaintiff filed the instant principal lawsuit on November 19, 2018, and did not engage in restaurant business at the instant store from January 2019.

On March 26, 2019, the Defendant filed a counterclaim by asserting that the instant lease contract was terminated on the grounds of the delinquency in rent for at least three years.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 21-1, 21-2, Eul 8, 9, 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant concealed the fact that water can fall at a large number of points in the store every time, due to serious defects in the ceiling site and outer wall of the instant store, and entered into the instant lease contract with the Plaintiff with the knowledge of the fact. The Plaintiff is revoked by the delivery of the copy of the instant complaint on the ground of the declaration of intention by fraud under Article 110(1) of the Civil Act.

arrow