beta
Text
1. Defendant D Co., Ltd.:
A. The plaintiff C indicates the drawings of the attached Form 2 among the real estate listed in the attached Tables 3 and 4 to the plaintiff C.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. A. On June 30, 2006, Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”) entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with regard to the instant commercial building on a two-year basis (based on September 1, 2006; hereinafter “this case’s lease agreement”) with the executor of the building on the land H (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) outside the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu, for a set of two years from the lease deposit per unit and the lease commencement date (based on September 1, 2006; hereinafter “this case’s lease agreement”) between the buyer and the seller, if all or part of the object is sold to the buyer in the future, the buyer comprehensively succeeded to the lessor’s status under the instant lease agreement, and Defendant D’s prior consent to such contract (see, e.g., prior consent) is not notified by the contracting party to the expiration of the lease agreement from June 1 to June 2006.
(see Article 18(2) of the Contract. (b)
Plaintiff
C A. On October 20, 2003, after selling Nos. 2036 and 2037 of the commercial building of this case from merms, C completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 1, 2006. The Plaintiff A sold No. 2035 of the commercial building of this case on July 24, 2006 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 1, 2006. The Plaintiff B sold Nos. 2069 and 2070 of the commercial building of this case on October 2, 2003 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 17, 2006.
C. Meanwhile, Defendant D, as the lessee of each of the stores listed in the Disposition No. 1 owned by the Plaintiffs, sub-leaseed each of the stores listed in the Disposition No. 2 to Defendant E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant E”), and accordingly, Defendant E occupied and used each of the sub-leases.
The contract of this case is not notified between the parties of the termination of the contract.