The agreement to pay the monthly user fee regardless of the actual operation hours of the mid-term season is reached, and if the owner of the mid-term equipment terminates after the suspension of construction by the mid-term season, the lessee shall be liable to pay the rent during the period of suspension

Even in cases where a user fee is agreed to be paid monthly user fee for ten hours a day and 250 hours a month as the minimum basic user fee regardless of the actual operating hours of the mid-term season, it cannot be said that the lessee is liable to pay the user fee even if the owner of the mid-term equipment rental contract of this case was obligated to pay the user fee even when the mid-term owner of the mid-term flag was the owner of the mid-term equipment rental contract of this case, in light of the terms and conditions of the contract of this case, the general principles of the contract, and social norms.

Article 623 of the Civil Act

Baman-ho

Kangsan Development Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 81Na2774 delivered on February 5, 1982

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Among the grounds of appeal Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the rent during the construction interruption period shall be determined together.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the defendant's assertion that the above construction was suspended for 43 days from February 2, 1980 to March 16 of the same year while the defendant leased and used the heavy machine from the plaintiff, and the construction was discontinued by the construction order of the Construction Headquarters of the Korea Electric Power Co., Ltd., the owner of the construction of the nuclear power plant in this case, and the mid-term rental fees equivalent to this period could not be paid. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion that the above construction was discontinued for 43 days from February 2, 1980 to March 16 of the same year under the order of the Construction Headquarters of the Korea Electric Power Co., Ltd., the owner of the construction in this case, which was the owner of the construction in this case, and that the above heavy machine could not be operated during that period. However, the defendant could not refuse the payment of the basic rental fees for 10 hours a day and 250 hours a month, regardless of the actual operation time.

However, in full view of the terms and conditions of the mid-term equipment lease agreement (Evidence A No. 1) between the plaintiff and the defendant as fact-finding data, the court below, regardless of the actual operation hours of the mid-term period, agreed to pay the user fee per month as the minimum basic user fee regardless of the actual operation hours of the mid-term period, and 10 hours per day, and 250 hours per month, does not say that the lessee is liable for the payment of the user fee even if the mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's mid-term owner's long-term owner's mid-term owner's long-term owner's long-term owner's long-term owner's long-term owner.

Therefore, since there is no need to determine the remaining grounds of appeal, the appeal is reversed, and the judgment of the court below is remanded to the Seoul High Court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)