beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As regards Defendant B’s KRW 129,877,600 and its KRW 128,200,00 among them, Defendant B shall be from August 20, 2014 to 1,677.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 30, 2009, the Plaintiff leased, respectively, real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) to Defendant B, with a lease deposit of KRW 50 million from December 5, 2009 to December 5, 2012, the rent of KRW 250,000 per month from December 5, 2009 to November 201, and the subsequent lease of KRW 3 million per month from December 2009 to December 2010.
(C) The Defendants asserted that there was no agreement to pay the value-added tax on monthly rent separately, or that there was no agreement to pay the monthly rent as KRW 3 million from October 5, 2010.
Although the instant lease agreement (No. 2) does not stipulate the same content as the above agreement, according to each content-certified mail (No. 8 and No. 11) sent by Defendant C to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff and Defendant B separately pay value-added tax on monthly rent, and then determine the monthly rent as KRW 3 million from one year after the lease agreement.
B. Around that time, Defendant C’s business operator registered as “D” and began with the Plaintiff’s consent to green retail and food processing business (hereinafter “instant business”) of the instant building, and the instant lease was renewed around December 2012.
C. On the other hand, on May 21, 2014, the Plaintiff notified Defendant B of the termination of the instant lease agreement on the ground that Defendant B did not pay the rent under the instant lease agreement, and Defendant B ordered the Plaintiff to order the instant building on August 19, 2014.
[Reasons for Recognition] A’s proof 1, 2, 2 through 4, 8, and 9-1 through 7 of the evidence Nos. 9-1 to 9 of the evidence Nos. 1 to 7 (each settlement statement) are deemed to have been prepared by the Defendant’s side employee. The fact that the credit card settlement amount deposited to the Plaintiff on each settlement statement is the same as the actual payment amount deposited to the Plaintiff.