logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.09.06 2017가단223445
임대차보증금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 2, 2012, the counterclaim Defendant entered into a lease contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the owner of the building listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant building”), and with the Lessee on July 2, 2012, with regard to the portion (A) size of 128.96 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”), which is 15,00,000 won, monthly rent of KRW 90,000 (excluding value-added tax), and on July 2, 2012, with the lease term of KRW 15,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. The instant contract was renewed once on July 2, 2014 under the same condition, except as the monthly rent of KRW 1,000,000 (excluding value-added tax), and was explicitly renewed on July 2016.

C. On October 19, 2016, the counterclaim Defendant sent to the counterclaim a proof of the content that the instant contract was terminated on the ground that the monthly overdue charge for four months was overdue, and filed a suit seeking delivery of the instant store and payment of delinquent rents, etc. on November 4, 2016.

On March 31, 2017, the instant lawsuit pending, the counterclaim Defendant received the instant store from the Counterclaim Plaintiff, and deposited KRW 4,000,000 as the remaining deposit money in the future of the Counterclaim Plaintiff on April 3, 2017, and withdrawn the principal lawsuit.

E. On June 5, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant counterclaim, while reserving the objection on April 10, 2017, and receiving KRW 4,000,000 as the deposit.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3 and 17, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Lessee’s assertion that the Lessee asserted the instant store paid KRW 2,000,000 for the registration cost of the septic tank and KRW 2,00,000 for the window replacement cost.

In the conciliation procedure to be held prior to the pleadings of the instant case, a decision was made in lieu of the conciliation with the content that the counterclaim Defendant pays KRW 6,00,000,000,000, which is the amount calculated by adding the above expense to the counterclaim, to KRW 4,000,000, which is the remainder of the deposit to the counterclaim.

Nevertheless, the counterclaim defendant is a counterclaim.

arrow