beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) received KRW 5 million from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and simultaneously received the payment from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 7, 2002, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant’s husband C on a deposit of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 300,000 (excluding value-added tax), and from November 11, 2002, with the term of lease of KRW 20 months (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). This agreement has been implicitly renewed.
B. C operated a factory with the trade name “D” in the instant real estate, and around August 201, the business owner changed the Defendant and the trade name into “E”.
At that time, the Plaintiff, C, and the Defendant agreed to change the lessee of the instant lease to the Defendant in C.
C. Around May 2015, the Defendant was unable to operate a factory normally as the instant real estate sewage plant was obstructed or discharged and became unable to operate the factory normally.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The allegations and judgment of the parties
A. On December 10, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant lease agreement was terminated due to the Defendant’s payment of rent up to December 10, 2012, and that the instant lease agreement was terminated due to overdue delay, and that the Defendant sought the delivery of the instant real estate and the payment of overdue rent. 2) As to this, the Defendant did not have any overdue delay, and the instant lease agreement was terminated due to flood, and thus, the Plaintiff asserted the termination of the instant lease agreement and sought the return
B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence submitted by the Defendant, it is determined that the Defendant paid all the difference to the Plaintiff up to April 2015.
① From October 201 to April 201, 2015, the Defendant paid all repair expenses incurred by the inundation of a factory during the rent from around October 201 to April 2015.
② The Plaintiff, including the above period, was replaced by the business owner in the name of the Defendant, on September 201.