logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2021.01.21 2020나40980
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

the purport and purpose of the claim;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 13, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) to the Defendants, fixed the Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building (hereinafter “instant building”) underground E (hereinafter “instant store”) to KRW 20 million; (b) monthly rent of KRW 180,000 (including KRW 100,000,000,000,000 for management expenses; and (c) from June 10, 2015 to May 24, 2017; and (d) leased the Defendants at KRW 24 million as premium.

After that, the term of lease was explicitly renewed until May 24, 2019, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the termination of the contract on May 6, 2019, and the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed to terminate the lease as of August 6, 2019.

B. On January 21, 2019, the Plaintiff entered into a real estate right transfer contract with F and the instant store’s premium amounting to KRW 20 million and received KRW 1 million down payment from F.

On January 28, 2019, F requested the Plaintiff to return the down payment to the effect that it is difficult to conclude the lease contract due to the illegal extension of the side surface of the instant building, and the Plaintiff returned the down payment to F.

【Ground of recognition】 Evidence Nos. 3 and 7, Evidence No. 9-1, Evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Defendants agreed to pay the premium to the Plaintiff in the event that the Plaintiff did not recover the premium later after receiving the premium from the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff premium of KRW 20 million (part of the claim).

B. The Defendants, despite the Plaintiff and F’s request, did not resolve the unauthorized extension portion of the 10th and the 2nd floor of the instant building, and F waived the lease of the instant store. Therefore, pursuant to Article 10-4(1)4 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the Defendants are obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 20 million for compensation for damages arising from the obstruction of collecting premiums.

(c)

There is no tangible or intangible asset value of the store in this case.

arrow