beta
Text
1. The Defendant: 5% per annum from September 5, 2013 to December 19, 2013 to the Plaintiff; and the following:
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On June 8, 2002, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit of 1.2 billion won (no rent) for the 1.2 billion won (hereinafter “instant store”) for the 108 through 114, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju Building (hereinafter “instant store”); the management fee of 1.9 billion won per month; the lease period from August 1, 2002 to July 31, 2004; and thereafter, the said lease agreement continued to be renewed by changing deposit, monthly rent, etc. on July 31, 2012; and the said lease agreement was renewed by setting the lease period of 1.8 billion won on July 31, 2012; the rent of 8,909,091 won; the management fee of 1,308,000 won; and the lease period of 1,308,000 won from August 1, 2012 to July 31, 2013 (hereinafter “the lease agreement”).
B. On May 8, 2013, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate indicating that the instant lease agreement will be terminated upon the expiration of July 31, 2013, and thus, the Plaintiff sent the instant store to the Plaintiff by July 31, 2013.
C. Accordingly, on May 10, 2013 and May 24, 2013, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff’s representative director visited the Defendant with two employees to postpone the delivery period of the instant store by September 30, 2013, and demanded reconciliation prior to the filing of a lawsuit to deliver the instant store by September 30, 2013, and the Defendant made best efforts to deliver the transferred building by September 30, 2013. However, the Defendant sought understanding that the delivery date may be delayed if the completion of the transferred building is delayed, and that the Plaintiff was able to obtain understanding by the time more than one month until the delivery is completed. D.
On May 28, 2013, the Plaintiff sent the following content certification to the Defendant.
- Around July 31, 2012, the Defendant concluded a one-year renewal contract under the extreme circumstances and did not extend the period.
- The defendant, without going through the lawsuit, voluntarily delivered the store of this case without going through the lawsuit, intended to cover the time until September 30, 2013, and the defendant against this.