beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 8,83,257 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from December 17, 2018 to August 27, 2019, and the following.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 12, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on approximately 330 square meters, which is the total area of the three floors of Seoul building in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and operated a room of 36 individuals.
B. Under the lease agreement, the lease deposit amount is KRW 70 million, monthly rent is KRW 5.1 million, monthly management fee is KRW 1.2 million, monthly management fee is KRW 1.2 million, and the lease period is two years, and the charges for causing traffic congestion is appropriated in accordance with the horizontal water and is paid separately from the rent.
C. The charges for causing traffic congestion imposed on the Defendant by the head of Gangnam-gu Office are KRW 207,005 per year from the year 2015 to the year 2018. The Defendant claimed KRW 2,272,170 in the year 2,250,204 in the name of the charges for causing traffic congestion, KRW 2,591,108 in the year 2017, and KRW 2,547,795 in the name of the charges for causing traffic congestion to the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the Defendant’s money received under the Plaintiff’s name in excess of the charges for causing traffic congestion imposed on the third floor of the instant building is the sum of KRW 8,833,257 (i.e., receipt exceeding 2,065,165 won in excess of 2,043,199 won in excess of 2,384,103 won in excess of 2,340,790 won in excess of 2,340,790 won in excess of 2017.
[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 8 (including virtual numbers), response to an order to submit tax information to the Gangnam-gu Office of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment asserted that the Plaintiff is obligated to return the money under the name of management expenses because the Defendant did not receive the above money and the buildings in excess after claiming the Plaintiff as the cause of causing traffic congestion, and did not properly manage the said money and the buildings.
According to the above facts, the defendant gains 8,833,257 won in total, which was received under the name of the charges for causing traffic congestion imposed on the third floor of the building in this case without any legal ground and the plaintiff.