beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.11.11 2016나44421

건물명도

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and incidental appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.

2.In the trial, the trial shall be held.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows: “A evidence No. 11” is added to the following sufficient evidence of the court of first instance, and “A. 11” is added to the fourth 19 and 5th 13th 13th 13th 4th 4th 4th 19 and 5th 13th 13th 4th 4th 19th 19, and the defendant’s counterclaim raised in the court of first instance is the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the judgment as referred to in the following 3th 3th 3th 3th 4th.

The term "after the expiration of the above term of lease" in the 17th to 18th and 4th of the 3rd, shall be read as "after the expiration of the term of lease on April 30, 2015".

The defendant in Part 8 of the third party shall add "the plaintiff" to "the defendant in Part 5" and "the defendant in Part 15."

2. The parts to be stated additionally in the trial; and

A. On the fourth 19th 19th 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance [In the case of the defendant, the defendant did not acquire the opposing power of the lease, and thus the plaintiffs did not succeed to the status of the lessor, or the plaintiffs requested to conclude a new lease agreement. However, in light of the process of concluding the instant lease agreement, the above arguments by the defendant cannot be accepted, since it is difficult to view the instant lease agreement as a separate contract.]

B. Chapter 13 of the fifth judgment of the first instance court [the purport of seeking unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated by the ratio of KRW 1.2 million per month from May 1, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the building in this case where the part claiming incidental appeal was excluded from the deduction of the rent already paid by the Defendant]

3. Judgment on the defendant's counterclaim

A. The fact that the instant lease agreement was terminated as of April 30, 2015 is as seen earlier, and the document No. 6 is written.