logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2017.12.21 2017가단6674
임차보증금반환
Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 40,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from February 28, 2017 to December 21, 2017; and (b) the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a person who runs the design business, and the defendant is a person who runs the external consulting business.

B. Around June 2016, the Defendant entered into a new business service contract with C department stores, food pipes, etc., and entered into a service contract with the Plaintiff on the content that the Plaintiff performs services such as designing and planning, and that the Defendant pays KRW 5,00,000 to the Plaintiff as service fees (hereinafter “instant C department store service contract”).

The Defendant paid KRW 10,500,000,000 to the Plaintiff on August 30, 2016, and KRW 20,000,00 as each service payment.

C. Around December 2016, the Defendant entered into a service contract related to F&B business with D (State), and entered into a service contract with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant D service contract”). Around December 2016, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff supported the said service contract, and the Defendant entered into a service contract with the Plaintiff.

On December 29, 2016, the Defendant paid 37,400,000 won to the Plaintiff as part of the service cost.

On the other hand, on December 2, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to lease part of 48m2 of the third floor of the Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul E-ground building, the Defendant’s office, at KRW 40,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,300,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and the Plaintiff paid KRW 15,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,300,000 to the Defendant on the same day.

On the same day, the Defendant prepared and issued to the Plaintiff a receipt (hereinafter “the receipt of this case”) stating that “The amount of KRW 40,000,000, and the above amount was regularly received as real estate rental deposit.”

E. On February 27, 2017, the Plaintiff retired from the subject matter of the instant lease agreement due to the occurrence of combustibility between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 6-1, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

arrow