logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2016.01.12 2014나21978
건물명도
Text

1. Of the parts concerning the counterclaim against the judgment of the court of first instance, the following amounts are equivalent to the amount ordering additional payments.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 18, 2007, the Defendant concluded a contract with the Plaintiff on the terms of “D, E, F, G, H land and buildings on its ground,” “local region-specific business”, “from April 18, 2007 to April 17, 2012” and “annual rent of KRW 8,367,50” to receive a loan.

B. Since then, although the Defendant tried to move in, there were some defects in the above ground buildings, the Plaintiff requested repair. Accordingly, on October 4, 2007, the Plaintiff brought a flood control construction work into the construction cost of KRW 4.2 million.

C. When the Korea Agricultural Technology Corporation, an incorporated association, asserts the ownership of the warehouse buildings, etc. included in the original loan agreement object and the defendant becomes unusable, the defendant concluded a contract with the term of lease "from October 5, 2007 to October 4, 2012" with only the buildings listed in the attached Table excluding the portion not usable by the plaintiff from the loan agreement object, and its site as the loan agreement object" and the loan fee "4,850,120 won per annum (However, the loan fee shall be collected annually; the number of days less than a month shall be calculated on a yearly basis; it shall be calculated on October 15, 2007 to October 14, 2012)" as the lease agreement object. However, the defendant finally changed the lease period from October 15 to October 14, 2012.

The term "the instant loan agreement" finally changed to the end is "the instant loan agreement."

(D) From October 2010, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the loan fee, and thereafter thereafter, on October 23, 2012, the Plaintiff terminated the instant loan agreement and notified the Defendant of the expiration of the loan fee and the return of the instant building on the grounds of the overdue loan and the expiration of the loan period. [In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, the evidence Nos. 1-2, 3, and 2-1 through 4, 3, 4-1, 2, 5-1, 5-2, 2, 3, 6-1 through 4, 8, 9-2, and evidence No. 18-2, and the entire pleadings.

arrow