beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.15 2016가단5076646

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. The attached survey and appraisal sheet among the buildings of the first floor in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government is marked 15, 16, 21, 24.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 25, 2012, the Plaintiff (Lessor) issued an order No. 1 to D (Lessee) around January 25, 2012.

On January 20, 2012, the lease deposit amount of KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 3.5 million, and the lease term of KRW 3.5 million from January 20, 2012 to January 20, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). On June 1, 2012, the Defendant succeeded to the lessee’s status under the instant lease contract of this case, and even after the lease term expires, the instant lease contract was explicitly renewed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with the same content.

B. However, the Defendant failed to pay the monthly rent in full or from time to time delayed, and at the same time, the Plaintiff maintained the lease contract by means of temporary accommodation that issues a letter of note to the Plaintiff. From June 1, 2012 to October 1, 2015, only KRW 125,800,000 out of the monthly rent of KRW 143,50,000 among the monthly rent of KRW 143,50,000, and did not pay the remainder.

C. On March 8, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a document certifying the termination of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the delinquency in payment of rent for at least two years, and the above content certification reached the Defendant around that time.

The Defendant, on June 1, 2012, occupied and used the instant store from the date of succession to the instant lease agreement to the date of closing argument.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 9 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the facts of the determination on the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated and terminated in accordance with the Plaintiff’s notice of termination on March 8, 2016, on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency at least two occasions, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff. (2) The instant lease agreement is related to the claim for unjust enrichment at rent.