beta
Text
The defendant shall pay 84,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 12% per annum from January 8, 2020 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including a number number) as to the cause of the claim, the purport of the whole pleadings is as follows: (i) on December 17, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement extending the lease period under the instant lease agreement from the defendant to January 7, 2018, with the lease deposit of KRW 84,000,000, and the lease term of KRW 84,000 from the defendant, Nam-gu, Incheon (hereinafter "the instant house") as of January 8, 2016 to January 7, 2018 (hereinafter "the instant lease agreement"); and (ii) thereafter, the plaintiff and the defendant concluded a lease agreement extending the lease period under the instant lease agreement to January 7, 202; and (iii) the plaintiff delivered the instant house to the defendant on January 7, 2020, which is the expiration date of the lease term under the said extension agreement.
According to the above facts, since the lease contract of this case was terminated on January 7, 2020, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff delayed damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from January 8, 2020 to the date of full payment after the date of delivery of the lease of this case, barring any special circumstance.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.
A. The summary of the defendant's defense, etc. is that the plaintiff asserted that the delivery of the house of this case is completed on January 7, 2020, and there was no fact that the plaintiff received the password from the plaintiff around January 7, 2020, and therefore, the plaintiff completed delivery of the house of this case to the defendant around January 7, 2020.
shall not be deemed to exist.
B. Since then, the Defendant discovered the fact that the Plaintiff notified the password and inspected the status of the instant house, which was partially changed in a remote area, which did not enter a part of a square light, and that all boilers do not turn on.
Ultimately, the Plaintiff, a lessee, failed to fulfill its duty to restore, and the sum of the cost of restoring the above defects to its original state.