beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly do so to the Plaintiff:
(a)one floor of the general steel structure and other roof on the ground of Pakistan D;
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 1, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B on a deposit deposit of KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 8 million (payment on the last day of each month), and the lease period of KRW 8 million from December 1, 2015, with respect to the general steel structure on the ground and other facilities for living in the second floor of the second floor of the roof, and the second floor of the second floor of the roof (hereinafter “instant building”).
B. After the above, the Plaintiff entered into a new lease agreement with Defendant C, the representative of Defendant B, with the content of the above lease agreement.
C. After the conclusion of the above lease agreement, the Defendants used the instant building as a cosmetic store and stalps store in the name of an individual or corporation. The Defendants delayed the payment of rent of KRW 48 million for six months until May 31, 2016 and thereafter rents.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the above facts as to the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that the Defendants jointly possess the building of this case and jointly and severally liable for the payment of rent. However, the Defendants delayed to pay rent up to six months until the filing of the lawsuit of this case, and on the other hand, the fact that the copy of the complaint of this case was delivered to the Defendants on the ground that the lease contract of this case was terminated on the grounds of the delinquency in rent of more than two years is apparent in the record, so the lease contract between the original Defendants was lawfully terminated
As such, the Defendants jointly sought delivery of the instant building by classifying it into the drawings.
However, insofar as the part for which the Plaintiff seeks delivery is the entire building of this case and the Defendants are deemed to possess it jointly, it is determined that there is no need to specify the delivery part by a separate drawing, and thus ordering the Defendants to deliver the entire building of this case.
India, 48.