beta
Text
1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
3. The defendants' lawsuit acceptance is based on the lawsuit acceptance of the defendants.
Reasons
1. Basic facts B, among the factory buildings located in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which were leased from Nonparty F on August 10, 200, lent approximately 40 square meters to the Plaintiff as KRW 1.5 million monthly rent of KRW 15 million. Upon termination of the sub-lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff delivered the leased object to B, and the Plaintiff died on April 10, 2017 and his heir died on April 10, 201, and the facts of the Defendant C and E, the wife, and the wife, were not disputed between the parties, or are recognized in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 1 and evidence No. 2.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to pay the plaintiff KRW 5 million after deducting the deposit amount of KRW 25 million from the deposit amount of KRW 25 million, as the plaintiff had renewed the sub-lease contract around November 2007.
As to this, the Defendants asserted that, at the time of renewal of the sub-lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Deceased, the Deceased demanded an increase of KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff, but they agreed that the Plaintiff and the Deceased shall have an increase of KRW 5 million, so the deposit to be returned to the Plaintiff shall not remain.
B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 3 through 7 above, the Plaintiff and B agreed to renew the sub-lease contract around November 2007 and to increase the rent to KRW 10 million. The Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Deceased with the increased deposit with the H and the increased deposit in the sub-lease object, respectively. The Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff with the money created by the Plaintiff and H. After the termination of the lease contract, the Plaintiff returned KRW 25 million out of the total amount of the lease deposit to the Plaintiff, and the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is rejected.