beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) receives KRW 8,118,200 from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 23, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the instant store KRW 30,000,000 ( KRW 3,000,000 on the date of the contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 7,000,000 until December 4, 2015, and the remainder of KRW 20,000 until December 4, 2015, or on the date when the deposit of KRW C operated by the Defendant is recovered, respectively), monthly rent of KRW 2,50,00 (excluding value-added tax), management expenses monthly, KRW 300,00 (excluding value-added tax), and the period from December 1, 2015 to November 30, 2017 to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant hotel”); and the Defendant agreed to provide the hotel with each of the instant types of zero (00,000,000) accommodation in the instant case.
B. After entering into the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff received KRW 10,000,000 (contract deposit and intermediate payment) from the Defendant, and delivered the instant store to the Defendant.
C. After that, the Defendant performed a restaurant business from February 15, 2016 in order to use the instant store as a restaurant, and provided the instant hotel hotel hotel hotel accommodation.
However, from February 25, 2016, the wastewater, etc. from the septic tank and the house alteration, which were underground in the instant building, flows into the instant store several times, and the water leakage occurred from the wall of the instant store. On June 20, 2016, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of the content that “the instant lease contract is terminated because it was not improved, although it was demanded to repair and prevent the recurrence water and the sewage, etc. of the septic tank and the house alteration,” and the above content certification reached the Plaintiff around that time.
The Plaintiff also did not pay the remainder of the lease deposit of this case to the Defendant on July 4, 2016, since the Defendant recovered the deposit of this case from the Defendant.