beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. The defendant A indicated in the attached Table 1st 217.83 square meters of the building indicated in the attached Table 1st 217.83 square meters and indicated in the attached Table 7 through 12 and 7.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the entries in Gap evidence 1 to 6, Eul evidence 1 (including a serial number if any) and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the measurement and appraisal entrusted to the Korea Cadastral Corporation by this Court.
D leased 217.83 square meters (hereinafter “the instant building”) from E, the owner of the building indicated in the attached list, from E, and the Defendant C, with the consent of E around December 10, 2012, borrowed from D the part (c) of the instant building (hereinafter “part (c) and 29.5 square meters (hereinafter “part (c) of the instant building”) in sequence, which connectd D with each of the items in the attached drawing Nos. 5 to 7, 12, and 5.
B. After that, on March 15, 2013, Defendant A and B agreed to lease the instant building (the right to lease of the instant building appears to have been acquired from de facto D) and Defendant A entered into a lease agreement with Defendant A on March 31, 2018 with regard to the portion (b) part (hereinafter referred to as “part (b) of the instant building”) 74.6 square meters in line with the drawings indicating 7 through 12, and 7 of the instant building (hereinafter referred to as “the instant building”), which is KRW 50 million in deposit, monthly rent, KRW 14.5 million in rental, and the period of March 31, 2018. Defendant B and the instant building agreed to each of the items (a) and (b) 71.3 square meters in line with the said drawings (hereinafter referred to as “the lease agreement”) for a period of KRW 50 million in deposit, KRW 30,000,000 in the previous building and KRW 31.3 (a) (a) hereinafter referred to as “the foregoing”).”).
C. On July 31, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased the building listed in the separate sheet from E, and acquired ownership on July 31, 2014. At the time, the Plaintiff agreed with Defendant A and B to deduct the same amount equivalent to the same amount from the purchase price of the said building instead of directly returning the amount of each of the above lease deposits to Defendant A and B (hereinafter “instant agreement”).
On the other hand, the Defendants are the closing date of the instant argument.