건물명도(인도)
1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On June 29, 2016, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement with D, etc., the owner of the building listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building”) and with respect to No. 1 floor E of the instant building from July 28, 2016 to July 27, 2018.
B. On September 19, 2016, Defendant C entered into a lease agreement with D, etc. on September 25, 2016 regarding the underground floor among the instant building (hereinafter “each of the instant lease agreements”) on September 24, 2018, without distinguishing the aforementioned two lease agreements from September 25, 2016.
C. On February 24, 2017, the Plaintiff purchased the instant building from D and two others, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 7, 2017, thereby succeeding to the lessor’s status of each of the instant lease agreements.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendants did not request renewal of each of the instant lease agreements, and the entire lease period of the Defendants exceeded five years, and thus, cannot be demanded renewal. In addition, the instant building is likely to be a safety accident due to aging, etc., and the Plaintiff expressed the Defendants’ intent to refuse renewal under Article 10(1)7 (b) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act. As such, the period of each of the instant lease agreements has expired, the Defendants should deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff on June 15, 2018. (2) The Defendants’ assertion that the instant lease agreement was terminated. (3) The Defendants requested renewal of the contract to the Plaintiff on the part of the Plaintiff on June 15, 2018. (4) The Defendants leased the instant building for the first time, and five years have not elapsed since they leased the instant building.
In addition, since the building of this case is unlikely to cause safety accidents due to aging, etc., the plaintiff cannot refuse the request for renewal by the defendants.
Therefore, ..