beta
Text
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
(a) deliver 84.63 square meters of buildings listed in the attached list;
B. From July 10, 2016, the above buildings are located.
Reasons
On April 5, 2016, the Plaintiff’s judgment on the cause of the claim may be acknowledged on April 5, 2016 by comprehensively taking into account each of the arguments stated in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 300,000, monthly rent of KRW 900,000, monthly rent of KRW 100,000, and monthly rent of KRW 100,000, and the lease period from April 10, 2016 to April 9, 2018. The fact that the Defendant delayed the rent of KRW 1,80,000 after residing in the building of this case to the present date while living in the building of this case and paying KRW 1,80,00 for the second month rent of KRW 1,80,00,00 to the Plaintiff, or that the Plaintiff’s complaint was served on the Defendant by the instant lawsuit by indicating that the lease was terminated due to the overdue delay of the rent of this case, and the above lease was terminated by the record.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, calculated at the rate of KRW 900,000 per month from July 10, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building from July 10, 2016 to the date of delivery of the instant building.
The defendant's assertion is asserted that since the defendant resided in the building of this case while living in the building of this case, the repair work of the building of this case increases the value of the building of this case, the plaintiff's claim for reimbursement of useful expenses against the defendant should be offset within the limit of equal amount. Thus, since there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant increased the value of the building of this case by the repair work of this case on the building of this case, the defendant's argument
Rather, according to the evidence No. 1, the plaintiff agreed to restore the building of this case at the expiration of the lease term, while entering into a lease contract with the defendant, and it is reasonable to view that the defendant renounced his right to claim reimbursement for beneficial costs.
The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.