beta
Text
1. The judgment of the first instance, including a claim modified or added in the trial, shall be modified as follows:
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is running a temporary material leasing business with the trade name of “D”, and the Defendant runs a building business with the trade name of “F”.
B. On June 27, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the temporary materials at the Defendant’s construction site located in Yangju-si with a rent of KRW 37,260,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). From that time, the Plaintiff transferred the provisional materials to the Defendant, including the instant temporary materials.
C. On March 5, 2013, the Defendant returned the remainder of the temporary materials except for the instant temporary materials.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1 through 6, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 1, the purport of whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement and leased temporary materials to the Defendant by stipulating that the Defendant and the rent shall be KRW 37,260,000, and the lease period shall be from June 27, 2012 to September 27, 2012, respectively, and shall pay the unit price per day when the use exceeds the contract period.
Even after the expiration of the lease period, the defendant returned only some of the temporary materials on March 5, 2013, and did not return the temporary materials of this case.
Even if there was no agreement on the term of lease, the Plaintiff sent a notice of termination to the Defendant on September 27, 2013, and received such notice to the Defendant on September 30, 2013, and thus, the instant lease agreement was terminated upon the lapse of October 7, 2013 pursuant to Articles 635(2)2 and 161 of the Civil Act.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the rent after the termination of the instant lease agreement with respect to the temporary materials due to either a special agreement or a tort. The Plaintiff claims KRW 84,205,125, which is equivalent to the rent from October 8, 2013 to December 26, 2014, taking into account the life of the instant temporary materials.
3.