beta
Text
1. Defendant C received KRW 19,500,000 from the Plaintiff, and at the same time, Defendant C received KRW 19,50,000 from the Plaintiff, the first floor of the real estate indicated in the attached Form.
Reasons
1. On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with Defendant C on a deposit of KRW 30,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000, and the period from June 8, 2015 to June 8, 2017 (24 months) with regard to the real estate owned by the Plaintiff as indicated in the attached Form No. 104.72 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”). The Plaintiff entered into a contract under the name of Defendant C, a mother of Defendant C, who is a Korean national, as Defendant C, as Defendant C was affiliated with a ship, and entered into a contract at the bottom of the instant lease agreement as follows.
(1) Premium: (2) If a lessor reverses a contract before the expiration of the contract period, it shall be compensated for 1.5 times premium. (3) Even after the contract period expires, the right to the premium shall be vested on the lessee.
Around June 2, 2015, Defendant C paid KRW 30,000,00 as a lease deposit to D, the Plaintiff’s wife, and paid KRW 1,350,000,000 for the premium of KRW 60,000,000 and for the rent of KRW 1,350,000 for the premium of KRW 1,350,00 for the premium of June 8, 2015. Around that time, Defendant C started running a singing practice room business under Defendant B’s name.
Defendant C was sentenced to a fine of KRW 500,000 in the Changwon District Court’s Tong branch on December 22, 2015 due to the violation of the Music Industry Promotion Act, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1,500,000 in the Changwon District Court’s Tong branch on November 30, 2016.
Defendant C paid only rent for 17 months from October 2016, and did not pay rent from November 2016.
[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence and Eul 1 to 7, 11, and 12 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against B, the parties to the instant lease agreement are Defendant C, not Defendant B, and thus, Defendant B’s claim on the premise that it is a party to the instant lease agreement cannot be accepted.
3. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C