beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.08.30 2018가단6512

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant,

A. Upon receiving KRW 14,500,000 from the Plaintiff, real estate indicated in the attached Table shall be paid to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on November 23, 2016 on a deposit of KRW 14,50,000, monthly rent of KRW 600,000, and June 30, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and the delivery of the said apartment. The Plaintiff purchased the instant apartment from C on May 25, 2017 and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on June 5, 2017, and the Defendant did not pay that the instant apartment was the tea of the instant apartment from December 12, 2017 to March 26, 2018, and the Plaintiff sent the notice of termination of the lease agreement to the Defendant on the grounds that the lease agreement was terminated on at least three occasions.

Thus, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated by the plaintiff's declaration of intention to terminate the contract due to the defendant's delayed delay. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiff and pay the plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent or rent by the completion date of delivery of the above apartment unless there are special circumstances.

2. The defendant's defense is without any obligation to respond to the plaintiff's request for evacuation prior to being paid KRW 10,000,000, which is agreed to be paid by the lessor when the defendant delivered an apartment during the lease period under the lease contract of this case.

First of all, as to the defendant's claim to return the deposit, the plaintiff purchased the apartment of this case from C, and acquired the lessor's obligation to return the deposit to the defendant under the lease contract of this case, i.e., the obligation to return the deposit to the defendant, and since the obligation to return the deposit and the obligation to return the object of lease are

Next, the plaintiff 10,000,000 won against the defendant from C.