(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.09.11 2018가단3934

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.09.11 2018가단3934

건물인도등

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. On February 20, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant for the lease deposit amounting to KRW 15,000,000, monthly rent, KRW 90,00, monthly rent payment period, from March 10, 2016 to March 9, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) on the part of the first floor in the ship connected with each point in sequence 1,2, 3, 4, 5, and 87.89 square meters on the attached list among the first floor in the attached list (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. On March 10, 2016, the Defendant received the leased portion from the Plaintiff, and registered the business on May 16, 2016 with respect to the leased portion of the instant case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1 and Eul evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the instant lease agreement was terminated on March 9, 2018, since the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of his/her intention not to renew the lease agreement upon the expiration of the lease term on January 2018, which was three months before the termination of the instant lease agreement.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the leased portion of this case to the Plaintiff and pay the amount calculated by applying the rate of KRW 900,000 per month to the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from March 10, 2018 to the delivery date.

3. According to Article 10(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, a lessor cannot reject a request for renewal of a contract between six months and one month prior to the expiration of the lease term without justifiable grounds. However, according to each of the evidence Nos. 3 and 4, it is recognized that the Defendant requested renewal of the lease contract to the Plaintiff on January 30, 2018. Thus, the above lease was renewed.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim based on the termination of the instant lease agreement is without merit.

4. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

참조조문

-상가건물 임대차보호법 제10조 제1항

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2016.09.06 2016가단208772

-인천지방법원 2016.02.03 2014가단66719

-인천지방법원 2018.06.07 2017나11049

-수원지방법원 2017.07.04 2016나75869

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.20 2019가단5130183