beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.28 2017가단5011547

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant shall receive KRW 5,000,000 from the plaintiff and at the same time real estate stated in the attached Table from the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 27, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer based on a sales contract with C on April 16, 2016 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On December 11, 2010, the Defendant entered into a commercial building lease agreement with a deposit of KRW 5 million for the instant building, from the delivery date of the lease term to December 22, 2012, and the monthly rent of KRW 500,000 for the instant building (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and operated the instant shop in the instant building.

Since then, the lease contract of this case has been implicitly renewed between the defendant and C.

C. On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the purport that it will no longer extend the contract upon the termination of the instant lease contract term through content-certified mail, and the Defendant occupies the instant building as of the date of the closing of argument in the instant case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2, 3, Gap evidence 4-1, Gap evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant is the lessee at whom the right to request the renewal of the contract was extinguished more than five years from the time of the initial lease pursuant to Article 10(2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act. Since the instant lease contract was terminated on December 22, 2016, the Plaintiff should deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff. 2) The Plaintiff made an oral agreement with the Defendant to renew the instant lease contract, and even if not, the instant lease contract was implicitly renewed, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

In addition, the defendant's duty to deliver the building of this case and the plaintiff's duty to return lease deposit are concurrently performed.

B. After the lessee acquired the opposing power under the Commercial Building Lease Act with respect to any object, the new owner shall be the previous owner in case the ownership of the object is transferred to a third party.