beta
Text
The appeal filed by the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff against the principal claim is dismissed.
The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) raised in this Court.
Reasons
Basic Facts
A. On November 13, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant on the condition that the instant house is leased by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 3 million, monthly rent of KRW 200,000, and the lease period from December 1, 2017 to May 31, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
B. On November 6, 2017, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 22 million to the Defendant, and the Defendant wired the Plaintiff KRW 200,000 to the Plaintiff on January 15, 2018, KRW 200,000,000 on February 6, 2018, and KRW 200,000 on April 2, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1 (a lease contract, and since there is no dispute over the part of the defendant's seal imprint, the authenticity of the whole document is presumed to have been established. The defendant denies the seal, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it), Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 4, and the purport
2. Determination as to the principal lawsuit
A. 1) The Plaintiff purchased the instant house from the Defendant on November 6, 2017, and around KRW 25 million, the Plaintiff directly paid to the Defendant, and the remainder of KRW 3 million, as the deposit for the instant lease agreement, agreed to offset the remainder of the purchase and sale payment. Since the Defendant deposited the rent under the instant lease agreement for three months, and the remainder of the rent was not paid. Therefore, as the instant lease agreement was terminated on the ground of the Defendant’s overdue payment, the Defendant delivered the instant house to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is obliged to pay the rent equivalent to the amount of rent calculated by the ratio of KRW 20,000 per month from June 1, 2019 to the completion date of delivery of the instant house. 2) The Defendant is not the Defendant’s ownership of the instant house and the Defendant did not reside in the instant house.
Therefore, the defendant's objection.