beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B received KRW 3,00,000 from the Plaintiff and simultaneously entered in [Attachment B] No. 1.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. 1) The Plaintiff is a housing reconstruction improvement zone A with a size of 45,839 square meters in Daegu Jung-gu, Daegu-gu E (hereinafter “instant improvement zone”).
(2) On November 1, 2004, the above Defendant leased the real estate listed in the [Attachment No. 1] No. 1, the unregistered building located in the rearrangement zone of this case from F, the owner at the time of November 1, 2004, and operated a restaurant with the implied renewal of the lease contract after October 31, 2006.
3) On May 31, 2010, the Daegu Metropolitan City Mayor designated the instant rearrangement zone. On June 20, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained authorization for establishment from the head of the Gu of Daegu Metropolitan City on June 20, 2014; (b) obtained authorization for the implementation of the project on May 8, 2017; and (c) was publicly notified on May 10, 2017; (b) the head of the Daegu Metropolitan City approved the Plaintiff’s management and disposal plan on February 14, 2018 and publicly notified on May 20, 2017. [Grounds for recognition] of absence of dispute; (c) Party A’s 1 through 5, and evidence Nos. 7 through 9 (including serial numbers; (d) the entries in No. 1
B. If a reconstruction project determines the cause of a claim and publicly notifies the approval of a management and disposal plan, the tenant of the previous land or structure within the rearrangement zone cannot use or benefit from the said real estate, and the project implementer may use or benefit from such real estate
[The Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents]
(1) According to Article 81(1) of the above Act and the above facts of recognition, Defendant B, a lessee, has the duty to deliver the above real estate to the Plaintiff as the project implementer.
C. Defendant B asserts that the return of the first lease deposit and the simultaneous performance defense of Defendant B cannot deliver the said real estate until the deposit is returned from the Plaintiff.
The fact that Defendant B paid KRW 3,00,000 to the lessor as a deposit for lease is the party.