beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 136,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 20, 2017 to April 3, 2018 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination on the claim for the refund of lease deposit
A. (1) On July 2, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the D subparagraph (a) and subparagraph (c) of the building in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 45,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,400,000, and the lease term of January 15, 2016. On June 18, 2015, the lease agreement entered into between the contractual party and the contractual party as “6.18, 2016,” but it appears that the Plaintiff had been arbitrarily amended.
Until June 17, 2017, the lease deposit for the above lease contract was changed to KRW 65,000,000, and the lease term was changed to KRW 1,000,000 by June 17, 2017.
(2) On September 14, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant for the term of 30,000,000 lease deposit for the instant shopping district F, G, and H, and monthly rent of KRW 1,00,000 (Provided, That this provision shall apply from October 2017) and the term of lease until September 30, 2018.
(3) The Plaintiff sold the instant shopping district F through E to a third party on October 12, 2017 in the course of the auction of real estate to the Suwon District Court J, which commenced on June 1, 2016, upon a request for auction by the I company (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). However, the Plaintiff did not have received any distribution of the lease deposit at all during the distribution procedure implemented on November 14, 2017.
(4) On July 11, 2017, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate each of the instant lease agreements on the grounds that the instant subparagraphs F or E were sold to a third party, and the said declaration of intent reached the Defendant around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, 11, 14 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts, since each of the instant lease agreements was lawfully terminated, the Defendant’s restoration to its original state to the Plaintiff (= KRW 65,000,000,000) and the amount of KRW 30,000,000.