건물명도
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant shall be liable to the plaintiffs, and to the land listed in the attached list.
1. 기초사실 이 법원이 이 부분에 관하여 설시할 이유는 제1심 판결문 제3쪽 제14행부터 제16행의 “철거한 채 현재까지 주문 제1의 가항 기재 토지 해당부분 및 지상 건물을 점유사용 중이다.” 부분을 “철거하여 현재 별지 도면 표시 ㈎, ㈏, ㈐의 각 건물과 같은 도면 표시 ㈑의 토지를 점유사용하고 있다.”로 고치는 것을 제외하고는 제1심 판결의 해당부분 기재와 같으므로, 민사소송법 제420조 본문에 의하여 이를 그대로 인용한다.
2. Determination as to the request for extradition
A. The fact that the Defendant was in arrears with the occurrence of the obligation to deliver was three or more times is recognized as above, and it is clear in the record that the duplicate of the complaint of this case, including the Plaintiffs’ declaration of intent to terminate the instant lease agreement, was served on October 5, 2016, and the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on October 5, 2016, with the Defendant’s rent delay.
따라서 피고는 원고들에게, 임차목적물인 별지 도면 표시 ㈎, ㈏, ㈐의 각 건물과 같은 도면 표시 ㈑의 토지를 인도할 의무가 있다.
B. The defendant's simultaneous performance defense (1) defense that the defendant could not respond to the plaintiffs' claims until the lease deposit is refunded. Thus, the defendant paid 30,000,000 won to the plaintiffs according to the lease contract of this case as seen above.
However, in a lease agreement, a security deposit is secured by the lessee’s all obligations arising from the lease after the termination of the lease agreement until the time of delivery to the lessor. The amount equivalent to the secured obligation is naturally deducted from the security deposit without any separate declaration of intention, barring any special circumstance. Thus, the lessor shall deduct the secured obligation from the security deposit.