beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the Defendant regarding the claim for beneficial reimbursement is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the grounds of appeal on the cost of restitution, the lower court determined that the cost of restitution to be borne by the Plaintiff, who is a lessee, is reasonable to determine the amount of KRW 16,789,195, which is 50 per cent of the cost of restoring the balcony, underground entrance, external fences, external fences, external temporary facilities, underground inside, windows, windows, entrances, toilets, toilets, entrance doors, and dumgs, among the instant real estate, to be incurred by the lessee as new products.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal by the plaintiff and the defendant, the court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation
2. As to the ground of appeal on the claim for reimbursement of beneficial expenses
(a) “The beneficial cost for which the lessee may claim reimbursement of the cost” refers to the cost disbursed for the improvement of the object of lease to objectively increase the value of the object, and does not correspond to the cost disbursed for the purpose of subjective benefit of the lessee or for a particular business purpose;
In addition, although a lessee may rebuild or alter the part of a building which is the leased object under the approval of a lessor when a lease contract is concluded, if the lessee agrees to restore the leased object to its original state with a burden of expenses incurred by the lessee, it is reasonable to deem that a special agreement is made to the effect that the lessee has waived the right to demand reimbursement
(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da20389, 20396 delivered on September 30, 1994, etc.). B.
The judgment below
According to its reasoning, the Plaintiff, a lessee, filed a claim with the Defendant, the lessor, for reimbursement of beneficial costs of KRW 5,00,000 for the remodeling construction cost of the instant real estate, KRW 6,745,00 for the electrical construction cost, KRW 4,80,00 for the cost of urban gas facilities construction, and the lower court determined that the remodeling construction cost is 55.