logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.17 2014가단229991
보증금반환
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 16,436,494 as well as 5% per annum from June 23, 2016 to August 17, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 24, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant store”) from the Defendant as KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 250,000, management expenses (each separate value-added tax, the first monthly rent of KRW 200,000, and the period of lease from March 25, 2014 to March 24, 2019).

(hereinafter “instant contract”). Under the instant contract, the original Defendant agreed to the effect that “if the annual rent of the lessee amounts to the annual rent of two (2) terms, this contract may be terminated immediately (Article 4).”

From March 25, 2014, the Plaintiff operated the restaurant business in the name of “C” at the instant store.

B. On October 28, 2014, the Plaintiff paid only monthly rent and management expenses for three months, and thereafter delayed monthly rent, etc., the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of content that contains an expression of intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on October 28, 2014, and thereafter the certificate of content was delivered to the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff’s business was discontinued by October 31, 2014, and around March 2015, the Plaintiff’s office opened the key to the instant store at the management office. However, the instant store had the Plaintiff’s house equipment and fixtures, such as misunderstanding, waves, computers, etc.

On June 7, 2016, when the lawsuit of this case was pending, the Plaintiff removed Kamer CCTV, etc. installed in the instant store.

On June 22, 2016, at the sixth date for pleading, the Plaintiff expressed to the Defendant the intent to waive the ownership of the house or waste remaining in the instant store, and the Defendant stated that the Defendant would bear the cost of cleaning the waste remaining in the instant store, and that the Plaintiff delivered the instant store to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 21-1, Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 2-1, 2, and 9, respectively, and evidence No. 13 and 21.

arrow