logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2016.08.30 2016가단103363
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendants and D are lease-related 1) The Defendants are forest E, 4,066§³ (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

As of the co-owner, Defendant B’s co-ownership shares are 8,132/8,967 and Defendant C’s co-ownership shares are 4,165/132. The Defendants leased the instant real estate to D on June 30, 2008 by setting the rent of KRW 500,000 per annum, and 36 months per annum, and D has cultivated the said real estate by clearing the said real estate on the said real estate.

According to the defendants' written opinion (No. 12 evidence) related to the administrative disposition of the charge for compelling the performance of the Si interest market against the defendants, D seems to have already occupied the real estate of this case since 2004.

B. After the expiration of the lease period, the Defendants failed to receive restitution and delivery of the instant real estate from D even though the above lease period had expired, and on March 201, the Defendants prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff the power of attorney as follows. The Defendants delegated all of the instant real estate to D who leased the instant real estate to the Plaintiff after the termination of the contract period, but did not deliver the instant real estate from D, and the Defendants filed a claim against D seeking restitution and delivery (U.S. Military District Court Ansan Branch Branch 2011Ga25831). Between D and D on June 27, 2011, “D shall deliver the instant real estate to the Defendants by no later than September 20, 201, and shall not request for authentication of a deed signed by a notary public with the content that “D shall demand any of the instant real estate from the Defendants,” and received any of the terms “D’s certificate of attorney’s performance as a notary public, 2011.”

3. After 3, the Defendants received the instant real estate from D, and the said court rendered the said judgment on September 22, 201 with respect to the instant real estate.

arrow