Text
1. Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B is simultaneously paid KRW 30,000,000 from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the second floor neighborhood living facilities (hereinafter “the instant building”) of the Busan Seo-gu D-gu D-based non- mobile steel bars and block block structure with the second floor of neighborhood living facilities.
B. 1) On February 10, 2014, the Plaintiff is the 135.20 square meters of the instant building among the instant buildings (hereinafter “instant building 1 story”).
A) A rental deposit was leased to Defendant B for a fixed period of KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 2.2 million, and the period of two years. Defendant B operated an entertainment drinking house with the trade name “F” at this place. In addition, around May 30, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the two floors of the instant building (hereinafter “second floor of the instant building”) to the Defendant C with a rental deposit of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1350,000,000, and two years, and the said period expired on May 31, 2015.
Defendant C operated an entertainment drinking house with the trade name of “G”.
C. 1) The lease contract for the first floor of the instant building between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B was extended implicitly after the expiration of the period on February 10, 2016. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit and expressed its intent to terminate the contract in the complaint, and the duplicate was served on the Defendant B on April 25, 2017. Accordingly, Defendant B consented to the Plaintiff’s intent to terminate the contract in the instant counterclaim, and the duplicate was served on the Plaintiff on May 29, 2017.2) Defendant C notified the Plaintiff of the intent to demand the renewal of the contract on April 28, 2017, prior to the expiration of the period on May 31, 2017.
The plaintiff expressed his intent to refuse the renewal of the contract with the complaint of this case, but the duplicate was served on the defendant C on June 8, 2017 after the impossibility of being served due to non-defluence in the absence of the text of this case.
Until now, Defendant B occupies the first floor of the instant building, and Defendant C occupies the second floor of the instant building.
【Ground of recognition】 There is no dispute.