beta
Text
1. The defendant is based on the ratio of KRW 21,00,000 to 20% per annum from June 17, 2014 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 10, 201, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement between the Defendant and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City 6-story Building No. 207 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 40 million and the lease term of KRW 40 million from October 27, 2011 to October 27, 2013, and paid the down payment of KRW 4 million.
B. On October 27, 201, the Plaintiff paid a balance of KRW 36 million on October 27, 201 and is living in the instant real estate.
In order to not renew the lease term of this case, I would not renew the lease term of this case, and request the return of the lease deposit and notify the defendant, but the remaining amount of KRW 21 million, except for KRW 19 million, after the lease term expires, the Seoul Central District Court received the lease order of KRW 201,00,000 on January 24, 2014 and registered the lease of the house of KRW 21,00,000,000,000,000 won after the lease term expires.
3. 21. According to the above court's decision of provisional seizure 2014Kadan34162, provisional seizure in the amount of KRW 21 million was executed.
C. On May 11, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred the instant real estate to the Defendant without receiving the remaining deposit of KRW 21 million from the Defendant, and was directors of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Western apartment 403.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff, a lessor who received the instant real estate from the Defendant, is liable to pay to the Defendant the remaining deposit amount of KRW 21 million and damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from June 17, 2014 to the date following the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint, as the Plaintiff seeks.
The defendant asserts that the plaintiff still occupies the real estate of this case as it is, and that the monthly management fee should not be paid after July 2013. However, the plaintiff still holds the house of this case.