beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 11, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with C as to the building of 52.93 square meters on the first floor in the second-class neighborhood living facilities of the first floor in Yongsan-gu D-gu and the second-class neighborhood living facilities of one story (hereinafter “instant building”) for five months from August 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014, with C, for a lease deposit of 10 million won, monthly rent of 4,000,000 won, monthly rent of 4,000,000 won, and lessee as the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and thereafter thereafter, the lease agreement was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.
B. On January 8, 2015, C filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff and the Defendant seeking the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent by the date of delivery and delivery of the instant building as Seoul Western District Court 2015da840 on the grounds of the expiration of the term of the instant lease agreement. On June 11, 2015, the Seoul Western District Court 2585, supra, deposited the deposit with the Plaintiff and the Defendant at KRW 97,901,630 remaining after deducting the unpaid electricity charge of KRW 2,096,370 from the deposit amount of KRW 100,000,000 from the deposit amount of KRW 100,000,000.
(hereinafter above KRW 97,901,630 (hereinafter referred to as “instant deposit”). The deposit cause stated at the time of the said deposit is as follows:
“Deposits and depositeds concluded a lease contract on the building of this case from August 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014, but the depositeds refused to assert the existence of the contract and to express their intent despite the termination of the contract (Seoul Western District Court 2015Kadan840), and the depositeds refuse to receive the lease deposit in the concurrent performance relationship with the name of the building. As such, the depositeds refuse to receive the lease deposit in the concurrent performance relationship, the depositeds will deposit KRW 97,90,630, which deducts the unpaid public charges of KRW 2,096,370 from the deposit amount to KRW 100,000,000,000,000,0000,000 won.”
C. On June 12, 2015, the Plaintiff issued the foregoing legal proceedings with the head of the 2015 Ghana23216.