beta
(영문) 서울고등법원(춘천) 2020.11.04 2020나389

임대차보증금

Text

1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is revoked.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding the part pertaining to 4. conclusion), except where the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance is amended as follows 2 and the judgment is added as follows 3, and thus, it is acceptable as it is

2. The modification of the three parts of the revised text boxes, namely, “A convalescent Hospital in the above real estate” is amended to “H convalescent Hospital” in the name of “H convalescent Hospital” from the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant hospital”).

The following shall be added to the 5th following:

At the end of the contract period, the transfer due to the sale and purchase of real estate at the time of lease and use shall be carried out, and this point shall not interfere with this point, and the 5th 2 to 7th 4th eth eth 7 below shall be revised as follows:

As long as the establishment of a disposal document is recognized as authentic, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable reflective evidence that denies the contents of the statement. In a dispute over the interpretation of a juristic act between the parties concerned, where interpretation of the intent of the parties expressed in the disposal document is at issue, the court shall reasonably interpret the said document in accordance with logical and empirical rules by comprehensively taking into account the contents of the language and text, the motive and background leading up to the juristic act, the purpose to be achieved by the juristic act, the parties’ genuine intent, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da23482, Jun. 28, 2002; 2017Da235647, Jul. 12, 2018). According to the results of an appraisal commission to G of the first instance court and the entire purport of oral proceedings, 272,470,58 won may be recognized between the parties.