beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the witness C’s testimony, either the following facts may be acknowledged: (a) the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4; (b) the evidence No. 6-4 and 7-3; and (c) the witness C’s testimony.
On September 3, 2005, the Plaintiff’s agent entered into a lease agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant on the deposit amounting to KRW 50,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,500,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,500, and the period from September 15, 2005 to September 14, 2007, and C, as the Plaintiff’s partner, paid the Defendant monthly rent of KRW 149.82,00 (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).
B. On January 17, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a new lease agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant, setting the period from September 15, 2007 to September 14, 2009 as KRW 50,000, monthly rent of KRW 350,000, and the period from September 15, 2007 to September 14, 2009.
C. On September 4, 2009, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a content-certified mail stating that “the lease contract is terminated upon the expiration of the contract term,” which reaches the Plaintiff on September 7, 2009.
Even if the lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated on September 14, 2009, the Plaintiff continued to occupy the instant commercial building, and the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a temporary injunction against the Plaintiff on August 201 (U.S. District Court Decision 2011Kahap141), and on October 10, 2011, on the condition that the Defendant deposited KRW 50,000,000 as security, the Plaintiff executed the instant commercial building on October 19, 201 on the condition that the Defendant deposited KRW 50,000 as security.
E. On August 12, 2011, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the instant shopping mall (U.S. District Court Decision 201Da32518), and the said court filed a claim against the Defendant on November 4, 2011.