beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff and D share the instant land as one-half shares, respectively.
B. The Defendant leased the instant land and used it as a parking lot by installing each of the instant ground objects on the ground.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff leased the instant land from the Plaintiff, and the Defendant agreed to restore the instant land to its original state by March 31, 2015, and the Plaintiff terminated the said lease agreement on March 12, 2015 on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to remove each of the instant land to the Plaintiff, deliver the instant land, and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from April 1, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the instant land.
B. The Defendant’s assertion does not conclude a lease agreement with the Plaintiff, but did not have agreed to restore the instant land to its original state by March 31, 2015, and determined that the instant land was KRW 900,000 per month, but thereafter, the said tea was reduced to KRW 850,00 per month and KRW 80,000 per month thereafter.
C. First of all, the written evidence Nos. 2-1 and 3-1 of the evidence Nos. 2-1 and 3-1 are insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant agreed to restore the land of this case to its original state by March 31, 2015, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the Plaintiff’s above assertion is not accepted. Thus, we examine the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the termination of the lease agreement
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5, the defendant agreed to lease the land of this case between the plaintiff and the plaintiff on March 24, 2006 at KRW 5,000,000, monthly rent 90,000.