beta
Text
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)
(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;
(b) 9,800,000;
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties or may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the entries or videos of Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 6-1, 2, and 3.
Attached Form
On June 9, 2010, the real estate indicated in the list (hereinafter “instant building”) completed the registration of initial ownership in the Plaintiff’s name. On June 19, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000 (in addition to value-added tax, KRW 30,000,00 for each month), and the lease term of the instant building as 24 months from June 30, 2012 to June 29, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
B. According to the instant lease agreement, the Defendant paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff and paid up to May 2013 when operating the instant building upon delivery, but thereafter, did not pay to the Plaintiff a rent under the instant lease agreement.
C. Meanwhile, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement on February 2014 on the premise that there was a defect in water leakage, etc. in the instant building, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not repair it even at the Defendant’s request, and that part of the second floor (hereinafter “non-party building”) of the Dong Kimpo-si Association, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “non-party building”) was leased at KRW 4,000,000, monthly rent 440,000. On March 24, 2014, the Defendant moved to the non-party building and moved to the non-party building for business from March 25, 2014, and did not operate the instant building.
As the Plaintiff did not pay that the Plaintiff was a tea under the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant claiming that the instant lease agreement was terminated on the grounds of the Defendant’s failure to pay rent more than two years, and sought unjust enrichment equivalent to the delivery of the instant building, overdue rent, and rent.