건물명도
1. The defendant shall deliver the building as stated in the attached Form to the plaintiff.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
3.Paragraph 1.
1. The following facts are recognized according to the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, 9, and Eul evidence No. 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings:
A. On October 10, 2012, the Plaintiff leased a commercial building attached to the attached Form to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 10 million, KRW 750,000 per month, and KRW 12 months per month (hereinafter “instant lease”), and thereafter the said lease was renewed once.
B. The Plaintiff failed to notify the Plaintiff of the rejection of renewal or to notify the modification of the terms and conditions by one month before the expiration of the renewed lease term on October 9, 2014 (the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the refusal to renew the lease term on September 15, 2013, one month before the expiration of the lease term) and the instant lease was implicitly renewed on September 10, 2014, which is one month before the expiration of the lease term.
(Article 10 (4) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act).
On January 9, 2015, the Plaintiff submitted to this court the instant application for conciliation with respect to the Defendant for the delivery of the building indicated in the attached Form, while the Plaintiff did not pay the Plaintiff the rent for October 2014, 11, and 12. On January 12, 2015, the said application for conciliation was served on the Defendant on February 12, 2015.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. As seen above, since the Defendant’s delayed delay amounts to three-year rents, the Plaintiff’s written application for conciliation of this case, stating the Defendant’s declaration of intent to terminate the lease agreement, was served on the Defendant, and the lease of this case was terminated at that time.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building stated in the attached Form to the plaintiff.
B. The amended Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, which was enacted on May 13, 2015, was enforced since May 13, 2015, and the said amended legal provision remains in force at the time of the enforcement of the said Act, since the Defendant asserted that it has a duty not to obstruct the Plaintiff’s claim by asserting that it is obligated not to collect the premium.