logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.24 2016나61657
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal (including costs arising from the extension of claims) shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The party's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (i.e., on October 10, 2008, the Plaintiff leased from the Defendant approximately 40 square meters on the right-hand side of the first floor of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Land Building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) from October 10, 2008 to October 10, 2010, the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, and the monthly rent of KRW 170,000,000 from October 10, 201, and the said lease was renewed under the same conditions as the previous one after the expiration of the lease period.

She, however, on April 1, 201, the Defendant unilaterally claimed an increase of the rent of KRW 2.7 million. A family affairs is not unilaterally claimed by the Defendant, but by agreement with the Plaintiff, even if it was based on an agreement between the Plaintiff, this is merely by the Defendant’s coercion.

Article 11(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (hereinafter “Act”) and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that the portion raised in excess of 9/100 of the amount prior to renewal shall not be valid. The Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff the total sum of KRW 70,106,871 (the specific calculation details shall be the same as the attached Table) and damages for delay paid by the Plaintiff, out of the rent paid by the Plaintiff from April 1, 201 to July 26, 2016.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the monthly rent of the instant commercial building is KRW 2.7 million is not the Defendant’s unilateral claim, but the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and thus, Article 11(1) of the Act does not apply.

2. Determination

A. According to the relevant legal principles and Article 11(1) of the Act and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, in cases where rent or deposit becomes unreasonable due to taxes, public charges and other burdens on the leased building or changes in the economic situation, the parties concerned may claim an increase or decrease in the future rent or deposit, but in cases of an increase, it does not exceed nine percent of the rent or deposit at the time of the request.

arrow