beta
(영문) 대구지방법원포항지원 2015.12.22 2015가단6072

부동산명도등청구

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. At the port of port, the number of trees planted on the land of 358m2, Nam-gu, Nam-gu, C, and the land above is collected.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 10, 2008, Nonparty D, who is the former owner of the Nam-gu, Nam-gu, C, 358 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”), concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with regard to the Defendant and the instant land by setting the deposit amount of KRW 2,00,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 150,000, monthly rent of KRW 150,000, and from November 10, 2008 to November 9, 201, respectively.

B. On November 10, 2008, the Defendant paid deposit of KRW 2,000,000 to D, and received the instant land from D from D, and planted and possessed trees on that ground.

C. D, on August 13, 2010, donated the instant land to the Plaintiff, ASEAN, and on August 16, 201, the ownership transfer registration of the instant land was completed in the name of the Plaintiff.

The Defendant paid only the rent of KRW 2,500,000 to the Plaintiff who succeeded to the status of D or D, a lessor, by June 10, 2015, and additionally paid the Plaintiff the rent of KRW 1,000,000 to the Plaintiff around October 2015, which was after the instant lawsuit was instituted.

E. The Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds that the instant complaint was not paid two times or more, and the duplicate of the complaint reached the Defendant on October 9, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Evidence A Nos. 1 and 2, a significant fact in this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts as to the termination of the instant lease agreement, it can be acknowledged that the sum of the rent for the 79-month period from November 10, 2008 to June 9, 2015 under the instant lease agreement was KRW 11,850,000, but the Defendant paid only KRW 2,500,000 as the rent to D or the Plaintiff. Thus, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated by the Plaintiff’s notice of termination as of October 9, 2015, on the ground of the Defendant’s nonperformance of the rental obligation.

B. As long as the instant lease contract was terminated with the Defendant’s obligation to pay rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to rent, the Defendant is from November 10, 2008 to June 9, 2015 to the Plaintiff.