beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 120,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from April 7, 2018 to the date of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On February 27, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the lease deposit amounting to KRW 120,00,000,000 and KRW 303,00,000,000,000 from March 31, 2016 to March 30, 2018, and paid KRW 120,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 was delivered to the Defendant and/or the Plaintiff.
B. On February 9, 2018, the Daejeon District Court rendered a decision to suspend the performance of duties as the representative director of the company B until the judgment on the merits of the case related to the company of the Daejeon District Court 2016Gahap102477 with respect to the defendant's representative director D until the judgment on February 9, 2018 became final and conclusive. During the suspension period of performance of duties, the Daejeon District Court rendered a decision to appoint the attorney E as the representative director (the Daejeon District Court 2017Kahap10198).
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1, 3, and 5 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the instant lease agreement was terminated on March 30, 2018, and the Plaintiff transferred the instant apartment through Non-Appellant F, Co., Ltd.’s employees F, a joint lessor on March 28, 2018, and the Defendant is obliged to refund the lease deposit amount of KRW 120 million to the Plaintiff and pay damages for delay.
The defendant asserts that the lease contract of this case was implicitly renewed due to the plaintiff's removal from the apartment of this case, but the apartment of this case was not delivered to the defendant or the vice-party company, and the plaintiff's rejection of renewal was not notified one month prior to the expiration of the lease term.
B. The judgment is based on the following: (a) the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement between the Defendant and the father’s passage, and the Plaintiff entered into the lease contract; and (b) KRW 120 million.