beta
Text
1. The defendant is against the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party
(a) deliver three floors of the real estate listed in the separate sheet;
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 30, 2009, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the designated parties entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit amount of KRW 65 million and KRW 2,200,000 per month for rent (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and delivered the instant real estate to the Defendant around that time.
B. Meanwhile, on May 2, 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract with C to sublease the first and second floors of the instant real estate at KRW 20 million, monthly rent, and KRW 1.3 million, with the consent of the Plaintiff and the designated parties, and around that time, delivered C the first and second floors of the instant real estate, and subsequently determined that the vehicle is to be paid to the Plaintiff and the designated parties.
C. From March 26, 2014 to March 26, 2014, the Defendant did not pay rent when occupying and using three floors of the instant real estate.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above findings, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated by the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case containing an expression of intent to terminate the lease agreement on the ground of the delinquency in rent.
As such, the defendant is obligated to deliver the third floor of the real estate of this case to the plaintiff and the designated person.
In addition, the defendant has the duty to pay the plaintiff and the selected parties the overdue rent and the real estate of this case to the plaintiff.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of KRW 770,00,00,000, which is the monthly rent from March 26, 2014 to the completion date of delivery of the third floor among the instant real estate.
3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the grounds that the claims of the plaintiff and the designated parties are reasonable.