건물명도(인도)
1. The defendant shall indicate the attached drawings among the real estate listed in the attached list to the plaintiff (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (7), and (8).
On June 29, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) leased the instant lease deposit of KRW 20 million to the Defendant on June 29, 2013; (b) during the lease period from June 29, 2013 to July 1, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”); (c) the instant lease contract was renewed and the Defendant continued to reside in the instant building due to the renewal of the lease contract; and (d) the Plaintiff did not pay the rent from February 2, 2018 to August 2018, on the grounds that the Defendant’s delay in rent was not disputed between the parties; or (e) the fact that the instant lease contract was terminated on the grounds that it was concluded on May 21, 2018 by taking into account the overall purport of pleadings as stated in the evidence No. A and No. 5.
According to the above facts, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated and terminated on the grounds that the defendant was not paid at least two years of rent, barring special circumstances, and thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the part of the building of this case to the plaintiff.
The defendant asserts that the plaintiff did not take any measure against the plaintiff's intrusion upon the defendant's house without permission, the south side outer wall of the building of this case around July 2017, and the Western side outer wall of the road around March 2018, and that the plaintiff's claim of this case was improper.
The Defendant’s argument that the Plaintiff did not properly perform the obligation to use and make profits from the leased object, thereby hindering the use of the leased object, and that the Defendant did not have the obligation to pay the Plaintiff the rent to the Plaintiff until the repair of the leased object was completed, and that the termination of the Plaintiff’s lease on the ground of the Defendant’s failure to pay the rent to the Plaintiff, is not legitimate, the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable, as there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact of the
If so, the plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.