beta
Text
1. The defendant is paid KRW 32,500,000 from the plaintiff and at the same time, from among the buildings listed in the attached Table to the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the judgment as to the cause of the claim (i.e., evidence Nos. 1 through 3) and the purport of the entire pleadings.
① On July 1, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with respect to the instant leased part of the instant building owned by the Plaintiff, which is KRW 80 million from August 1, 2015 to July 30, 2018, and the monthly rent of KRW 4 million from July 30, 2018. The agreement was concluded that the Defendant shall pay the rent plus 1.5% if the monthly rent is overdue, and that the Defendant shall automatically terminate the contract at the time of arrears of three months, and that the said lease agreement is terminated due to the termination or termination of the contract, the Defendant shall restore all structures installed at the expense to its original state, such as removing all structures.
② However, the Defendant paid KRW 3,850,00,00 (including additional taxes) out of the rent from August 2, 2015 to February 2, 2016, on the ground that circumstances are not open to the court, and did not fully pay the rent from March 2016 to May 2016, which was from March 2016.
③ On the other hand, the copy of the complaint of this case containing the Plaintiff’s intent to terminate the said lease agreement on the grounds of the failure to pay rent for at least three months was delivered to the Defendant on August 3, 2016.
According to the above facts of recognition, the above lease contract between the plaintiff and the defendant was terminated on August 3, 2016.
As such, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the leased portion of this case to the Plaintiff due to the termination of the lease upon termination of the lease, and to pay the Plaintiff KRW 47.5 million (5 million per month of unpaid rent from August 2015 to December 2, 2016) in total (50,000 per month of unpaid rent from August 2015 to February 2016).
I would like to say.
However, the defendant's defense to the effect that the deposit should be returned simultaneously with the return of the deposit amount of KRW 80 million, so the defendant is not paid from the plaintiff to the plaintiff.