logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.21 2017가합547833
부당이득반환
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a company running real estate leasing business, etc., and is the owner of the first underground floor and the fifth floor above ground located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On October 20, 2006, the Defendant leased to H 55 stores on the first floor of the instant building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) with lease deposit of KRW 302,50,000, rent of KRW 16,500,000, management fee of KRW 700,000, management fee of KRW 700,000, and period of lease from May 12, 2006 to May 11, 2008.

C. The Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with H on the lease-sale of the individual stores of the instant commercial building, as indicated in the table below.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement” and “each of the instant stores leased and sold by the Plaintiffs.” The Plaintiffs paid development expenses to H according to the instant lease agreement.

Plaintiff A (including development costs) Nos. 50, 51 (2), 70 million won (including development costs of KRW 50,000) on the date of concluding a contract, Plaintiff B, 207. 03. 27, 28 (2), 90 million (including development costs of KRW 70,000) on December 54, 2006 (1.5), and 2.5 million (including development costs of KRW 37,50,000) on December 19, 206 (including development costs of KRW 37,50,000) on November 21, 2006, Plaintiff D’s KRW 52,53 (2,440,000 won) on November 24, 2006 (including development costs of KRW 84,740,000 (including KRW 37,7500,000), and Plaintiff B, 300,000 won (including KRW 374,74630,74000.

D. From March 2007 to June 2008, the Plaintiffs concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease each of the instant stores by setting the lease period as two years between the lease and the sale period.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement.” The Defendant continued to renew the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiffs, and on February 28, 2017, the term of lease expires, and the instant lease agreement was terminated without renewal.

E. Meanwhile, H is the amount of the instant commercial building at the development cost that was paid by the Plaintiffs.

arrow