beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall each month from March 21, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the building indicated in the attached list from March 21, 2018 to the Plaintiff’s KRW 30,000,000.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 19, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant and the Plaintiff for the lease deposit amounting to KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 900,000 (payment on July 20), from July 19, 2015 to July 18, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
B. When the Plaintiff was in arrears after March 21, 2018, on October 19, 2018, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that the Plaintiff seeks the return of the instant building on the grounds of the expiration of the lease term or the delay in rent (hereinafter “instant certificate”) and served on October 22, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap1 to 5 evidence (including additional number), purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the content certification of this case was lawfully terminated on October 22, 2018, which was delivered to the Defendant (it is reasonable to deem that the content certification does not explicitly terminate, but is claiming the return of the building of this case while mentioning the leased body, and even if not, it is deemed that the notice of termination of the lease of this case was issued by the delivery of the complaint of this case). The Defendant is obliged to receive the remainder of money calculated at the rate of KRW 900,000,000, which was calculated from March 21, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the building of this case from March 21, 2018 to the date of delivery of the building of this case from March 21, 2018 to the date of delivery of the building of this case.
3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant asserted that the contract of this case is not valid since the Defendant agreed to suspend or deduct the rent in arrears with the Plaintiff at a one-year grace period around December 2017. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
(b)be used for purposes;