beta
Text
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;
(b) from May 15, 2014 to the annexed list.
Reasons
1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 7, the result of a request for appraisal of rent against appraiser B of this court, the purport of all pleadings);
A. On July 2, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with 51 households and 11 households of officetels, including real estate in the attached Table (hereinafter “real estate in this case”), which is part of the said building, to the so-called “non-party company”) (hereinafter “non-party company”). The lease term was determined as KRW 90 million from the date of commencement of lease under the first lease agreement until May 14, 2014; KRW 35 million from the date of rent; KRW 5 million from the date of rent; and KRW 5 million from the date of rent under the first lease agreement.
B. On May 13, 2009, the Plaintiff and Nonparty Company concluded a lease agreement with 52 units of apartment units and 13 units of officetels of the above C building, but concluded a lease agreement with 51 units of apartment units and 11 units of officetels by setting the lease term from May 11, 2012 to May 12, 2012, the expiration of the period from May 12, 2012, to May 12, 2012. The Plaintiff and Nonparty Company re-entered a lease agreement with 51 units of apartment units and 11 units of officetels during the contract period. A certain contract period is modified.
The instant lease agreement was concluded as described in the subsection.
C. On February 27, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract to rent the instant real estate (hereinafter referred to as the “instant sublease contract”) with the Nonparty Company from March 1, 2013 to May 12, 2014, setting the period of sublease from March 1, 2013 to May 12, 2014, with a deposit of KRW 10 million and monthly rent of KRW 1.8 million, and currently occupies and uses the instant real estate.
On March 2014, the Plaintiff renounced the claim for the return of the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement between the non-party company and the non-party company. The Plaintiff is an object of the said lease agreement only on the amount corresponding to the said amount of the loan that the non-party company gave up.