logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.08.31 2017나11806
보증금반환
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the counterclaim defendant is revoked, and the part against the counterclaim plaintiff corresponding to the revoked part is revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) On June 11, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease contract: (a) the first floor of the Bridge-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Cbuilding from the Defendant on June 11, 2012 (hereinafter “the first floor store”).

) A lease deposit was leased at KRW 10 million, KRW 300,000 per month (excluding value-added tax), and period of lease from August 23, 2012 to August 22, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

3) Since then, the Plaintiff is obliged to pay KRW 100 million to the Defendant the above lease deposit (hereinafter “the lease deposit of this case”).

(2) On December 14, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to increase the rent of KRW 3.5 million from August 1, 2013 to KRW 3.5 million (excluding value-added tax). Meanwhile, on December 14, 2012, the Plaintiff additionally leased the said 2nd floor of building (hereinafter “instant 2nd floor store”) from the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 1500,00,000,000 from December 24, 2012 to December 23, 2014.

Since then, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million to the Defendant as a deposit for lease, and agreed to increase the rent by KRW 2 million per month in lieu of reducing the deposit for lease under the above contract with the Defendant as KRW 50 million.

3) On August 2014, the Plaintiff renewed the instant first-class lease contract and leased the instant first-class store from the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 100 million and the lease term of KRW 20 million from August 23, 2014 to August 22, 2016 (hereinafter “instant second-class lease contract”) (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and if it is not necessary to separately state the said first-class lease contract, “the instant lease contract” shall be deemed to be “the instant lease contract”.

B. On October 14, 2015, the Defendant filed a main lawsuit against the Plaintiff, which sought the delivery of the instant 1st floor store by the Jeonju District Court 2015dan32198.

After the termination of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff delivered the above store to the Defendant on October 24, 2016, and the Defendant withdrawn the above principal suit on November 8, 2016.

arrow