beta
Text
1. For the plaintiffs:
A. The Defendants deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;
B. Defendant C shall be KRW 700,000 and January 2019.
Reasons
1. In full view of the respective entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5 and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the facts recorded in the grounds of the claim can be acknowledged, and no other counter-proof exists.
(3) In light of the above facts, the above agreement of this case as to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the real estate of this case”) was lawfully terminated on the ground of Defendant C’s delinquency in rent, and Defendant D possessed the real estate of this case without any lawful possession right. Thus, the joint owner and lessor of the real estate of this case were transferred to the Plaintiffs, the Defendants delivered the real estate of this case, and Defendant C, from February 2, 2019 to the completion date of delivery of the real estate of this case, is obligated to pay the rent of this case or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of 1,400,000 won per month calculated on the basis of overdue rent of this case.
As to this, Defendant D did not possess the instant real estate other than the business owner’s name before February 2019, and at present, Defendant D’s assertion to the effect that, by cancelling the business owner’s name, it does not constitute a whole of the instant real estate. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, the above assertion by Defendant D is without merit.
According to reference materials submitted by Defendant D on July 24, 2020, after the closing of argument, Defendant D’s general restaurant was closed in the name of “E” with the location of the place of business on March 20, 2020.
However, according to the records of this case, the plaintiffs filed a provisional disposition against the defendant D on January 16, 2020 on the real estate of this case with the court 2020Kadan100119, and completed its execution on February 13, 2020. Thus, as long as the defendant D does not return the real estate of this case to the plaintiffs, the above provisional disposition against the plaintiff and the defendant D on the provisional disposition against the prohibition against the transfer of possession of the real estate of this case is rendered.