beta
Text
1. The defendant shall receive KRW 200,000,000 from the plaintiff, and at the same time, shall be listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On October 21, 2010, the Plaintiff: (a) determined the building listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant as of October 21, 201 by the lease deposit amounting to KRW 160 million; and (b) leased the building without agreement on monthly rent (hereinafter “instant lease”); (c) on October 22, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration for the establishment of chonsegwon (hereinafter “registration for the establishment of chonsegwon”) listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant lease”).
B. On October 18, 2012, the Plaintiff extended the term of the said lease agreement to October 21, 2014, and increased the lease deposit to KRW 200 million. On October 19, 2012, the Plaintiff registered the change of the term from October 22, 2012 to October 21, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the term of the instant lease agreement expires, the Defendant is obligated to receive KRW 200 million from the Plaintiff, as well as to take procedures for registration of cancellation of the instant lease on a deposit basis and deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.
The plaintiff asserts that the defendant shall receive the remaining money calculated by deducting the amount of KRW 1 million per month from the plaintiff, not KRW 200 million, from KRW 200 million, and at the same time implement the procedure for cancellation registration of the registration of the right to lease on a deposit basis of this case and deliver the building of this case. However, as seen above, although the plaintiff did not agree to pay monthly rent in the lease contract of this case even after the expiration of the lease contract of this case, as long as the plaintiff did not return the deposit amount of KRW 200 million even after the expiration of the lease contract of this case, the plaintiff's allegation in this part is rejected.
B. The defendant.