beta
Text
1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.
(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;
(b) 10,100,000 won and January 21, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On February 20, 2007, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, with a lease deposit of KRW 12 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.1 million, and the period of February 20, 2007, as two years from February 20, 2007.
B. Under the above lease agreement, the Defendant paid 12 million won to the Plaintiff, and received and enjoyed the above real estate from time to time.
C. As of January 20, 2017, the Defendant delayed to pay the rent of KRW 13.2 million. Meanwhile, on July 4, 2016 and August 8, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to pay the overdue rent, notified the termination of the lease agreement and the delivery of the said real estate, and the notification reached the Defendant around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3-1, 2-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition, since the above lease has been lawfully terminated by the plaintiff's notice of termination due to the delay in rent of the defendant, the defendant is obligated to deliver to the plaintiff real estate stated in the separate sheet, barring any special circumstances, and to pay to the plaintiff unjust enrichment of the rent of the rent of the rent of the rent of the rent of the rent of the rent of the rent of the rent of the rent of 13.2 million won as of January 20, 2017, and the plaintiff's claim from January 21, 2017 to January 1.1.1 million won per month.
B. The Defendant’s assertion and its determination 1) asserted that the Defendant paid an additional amount of KRW 3.1 million after filing the instant lawsuit claiming the deduction of the rent that was additionally paid. As such, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant first paid KRW 2 million to the Plaintiff on March 20, 2017, and April 5, 2017, the Defendant paid KRW 2 million to the Plaintiff on April 5, 2017. However, the previous assertion was modified while paying the rent in monthly rent. Since the fact that the Defendant paid the rent in monthly rent does not conflict between the parties, the Defendant’s assertion is with merit.