Text
1. The defendant
(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;
(b)payment of KRW 1,200,000;
C. . 200.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 3, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) that leases real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 5,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 300,000, and the rent of KRW 8,000, monthly rent of KRW 300,000, and the rent of KRW 8,000, respectively.
B. From February 2017 to August 2018, the Defendant delayed the payment of KRW 5,400,000 monthly rent for about 18 months from around February 2017, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to offset the said unpaid rent against the Defendant’s claim for refund of the lease deposit as to the instant lease agreement.
C. Since January 2020, the Defendant delayed the payment of monthly rent as stipulated in the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement, thereby filing the instant lawsuit seeking delivery of the instant real estate, monthly rent, and unjust enrichment. The duplicate of the instant complaint reached the Defendant on April 27, 2020.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 16, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition, due to the Plaintiff’s arrival of the Defendant of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, which included the termination of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the delay in the payment of rent for at least two months of the Defendant’s monthly rent, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on April 27, 2020.
I would like to say.
Therefore, the defendant delivers the real estate of this case to the plaintiff, and pays a total of KRW 1,200,000 for the unpaid monthly rent from January 9, 2020 to April 8, 2020, and is obligated to pay the monthly rent of KRW 300,000 per month from April 9, 2020 to the completion date of the delivery of the real estate of this case or return the unjust enrichment equivalent to the above amount.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.