beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasons why a party member of the court of first instance shall explain this case are as follows, and this case is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, because the defendant's reasoning is the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the following judgments in
2. The Defendant, upon preparing a direct lease agreement with a lessor after drawing a lot of land on the instant commercial building, determined that the instant lease agreement would be null and void, and that the relationship with a lessor would be governed by a new lease agreement. On October 2010, the instant lease agreement was concluded between E and E, a lessor of the instant commercial building, and thus, the instant lease agreement becomes null and void. Accordingly, the Defendant asserts that there is no obligation to pay the parcelling-out price under the instant lease agreement.
According to the statement in the evidence Nos. 1 and 9, Article 1 (3) of the instant lease contract is prepared with a lessor after drawing up a store, and the sales contract is invalidated after drawing up a new lease contract, and the relationship with a lessor is stated by a new lease contract. The fact that the lease contract for the instant commercial building was made between the Defendant and the lessor of the instant commercial building on October 26, 2010 can be acknowledged.
However, each of the above evidences and evidence evidence No. 2 can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the lease contract of this case is a contract for selling the first right of lease to the commercial building of this case under the condition that the owner or lessor of the commercial building of this case and the lessee are not determined. The lease deposit for this case includes the lease deposit and the lease deposit for the commercial building of this case.