logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.12.08 2020가단5215295
임대차보증금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 56,532 and KRW 400,000 among the Plaintiff’s KRW 556,532 are 5% per annum from March 2, 2020 to December 8, 2020.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On November 7, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the Defendant and C on a deposit basis of KRW 100,000,000 per deposit, KRW 12,500,000 per month of rent (payment after the end of each month), and from March 1, 2018 to March 1, 2020, and paid the full deposit amount to the Defendant and C by the beginning date of the lease term.

On March 1, 2020, the Plaintiff delivered the instant store to the Defendant and C on March 1, 2020.

On or before March 20, 2020, the Plaintiff returned part of the deposit amount (the portion corresponding to C’s portion out of the deposit repayment obligation) from C, a joint lessor, and the Defendant paid KRW 28,567,839 on April 9, 2020 and paid KRW 25,000,000, and KRW 3,567,839 on April 17, 2020.

[Ground of appeal] The plaintiff asserted as to the purport of the whole pleading by the plaintiff as to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleading is as follows: the plaintiff did not receive only KRW 28,567,839 out of KRW 29,437,269, which deducted KRW 50,562,731 from overdue rent, etc. from the defendant, and received only KRW 28,567,839 from the remainder of KRW 29,430.

In addition, since the returned 28,567,839 won was returned later than the due date, there was 385,071 won in overdue interest at the rate of 12% per annum as shown below.

Therefore, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1,254,501 (=869,430 won) and KRW 869,430 among them, delay damages from March 2, 2020.

B The Plaintiff’s unpaid public imposts 469,430 won (=electric charge of KRW 328,320) and KRW 400,000 of the cost of the instant store’s remuneration should be deducted from the lease deposit. As such, the Defendant’s additional refund deposit does not remain to the Plaintiff.

Judgment

According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 3 through 7 and the whole pleadings, the plaintiff is an employer of the electricity fee of the store of this case 328,320 won.

arrow