logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.07.19 2016가합51036
건물명도
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. Of the buildings listed in the attached list, the second floor is 304.45 square meters.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 30, 2010, each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) as to one-half shares among the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”)

5.27. Completion of the procedures for ownership transfer registration by reason of sale.

B. On September 3, 2010, the Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease the part of the first floor of the instant building with the term of KRW 140 million (excluding value-added tax), KRW 7 million per month of rent (excluding value-added tax), and the term of lease from September 1, 2010 to August 31, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and ② the part of the instant building with the term of lease with the term of KRW 80 million (excluding value-added tax), KRW 4 million per month of rent, and KRW 4 million per month of rent (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). From September 1, 2010 to August 31, 2015, each of the following special agreements was concluded:

Paragraph 3. Premiums and time facilities shall not be recognized and shall not be claimed to the lessor.

When the contract period of paragraph (4) expires, the lessor is planned to use the store, and the lessee shall remove the facility house.

When the contract period of paragraph (5) becomes three years, the rent shall be increased by 20% and applied.

【Ground for recognition】 The facts without dispute, Gap’s evidence 1, Gap’s evidence 5-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. According to the fact that the duty to return the building delivery and unjust enrichment occurred, the second lease contract of this case expired on August 31, 2015, and barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to deliver the second floor of the building of this case to the plaintiffs, and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the second floor of the building of this case from the day following the expiration date of the above lease term to the delivery date of the above part of the building of this case.

As to this, the defendant shall be the plaintiffs.

arrow