beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 1, 2012, the Plaintiff between the Plaintiff and C leased the entire nine stories in Seo-gu Incheon (No. 901 and 902) and the whole ten stories in the 10th (No. 1001) from C (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) for the purpose of cutting back, locking off, holding events, and conducting various similar businesses, and between C and C, the lease deposit amount is KRW 100 million for the entire nine stories and the ten stories, from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014, each of the lease deposit amount is KRW 6 million for the lease deposit, monthly rent, and the lease contract (No. 2) made between the Plaintiff and C, with respect to the entire nine stories and the ten stories, the lease deposit is KRW 200,000,000,000 for the entire nine stories, the object of the lease.
Since that time, the lease contract was concluded as set forth in the above 9th and the 10th and the 10th and the 10th and the 5th and the 5th and the 5th and the 5th and the
B. On April 5, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed to transfer to the Defendant all the rights, including the facilities with the F points of the 10th floor of the instant building and the claim for the refund of lease deposit, on April 5, 2013, and upon receiving KRW 150 million from the Defendant as part of the above KRW 300 million, the contract for the transfer of the said facilities and rights (hereinafter “instant contract”).
A) The contract of this case entered into with the Plaintiff and the Defendant. The contract of this case is a special agreement entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and the full payment of KRW 150,000,000 for the remainder of the premium until December 31, 2013: Provided, That in the event of nonperformance, the contract will be subject to the change of the business operator except for KRW 20,000,000 from the premium of this case (hereinafter
2) Furthermore, under the understanding of C, the Plaintiff changed the lessee’s name as to the 10th floor of the instant building from the Plaintiff to the Defendant (a claim for the return of the lease deposit as to the 9th floor of the instant building is still owned by the Plaintiff). Accordingly, C and the Defendant on April 26, 2013.