beta
(영문) 대구지방법원김천지원 2020.07.15 2019가단3543

건물인도

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. 2,400,000 Won and above from April 23, 2020

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the following facts: (a) there is no dispute between the parties; or (b) evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 2-1, 2, 3, 3, 1, 2, 3, and 4 of evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2, 3, and 4; and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.

As to the building listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”), the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, annual rent of KRW 18,000,000, and the term of lease from April 23, 2018 to April 22, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 2,00,000,000 each time in two months after June 2018, by dividing the deposit into circumstances, as well as KRW 10,000.

C. The Defendant concluded the instant lease agreement and paid KRW 18,00,000 for annual rent in 2018, and the instant lease agreement was renewed. On May 14, 2019, the Defendant paid KRW 12,000,000 for annual rent in 2019, and did not pay KRW 10,000 for the instant lease agreement.

Meanwhile, at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the two parties were expected to be removed, and the two parties were removed from around August 2019, and the two parties were to remain 40,000 guidances.

E. On August 2, 2019, the Plaintiff issued to the Defendant a certificate of content that the instant lease was terminated and the Plaintiff would seek delivery of the instant building, while the Plaintiff did not pay KRW 6,00,000 out of the annual rent in 2019 to the Defendant by August 15, 2019, without paying the rent by August 15, 2019.

Therefore, the defendant issued a certificate of content that the plaintiff's allegation of termination of the contract was unfair since the plaintiff did not perform his obligation to pay the deposit because he did not perform his obligation even though he newly constructed and newly constructed one fraternity, and 12,000,000 won was paid as the annual rent for the four fraternitys.

F. The plaintiff.