(영문) 대전지방법원논산지원 2015.01.29 2014가단4814

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) 대전지방법원논산지원 2015.01.29 2014가단4814

건물명도 등

Text

1. The defendant

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. Gold 22,200,000 won and its related thereto

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3:

On August 31, 2012, the Plaintiff set the period from August 1, 2012 to August 31, 2014, and leased real estate listed in the attached list to the Defendant as KRW 2,00,000 (value-added tax separate: Provided, That from January 1, 2013 to March 2013, value-added tax separate KRW 1,00,000).

Article 5 of the above lease agreement provides that "a lessee may remodel or alter the lease agreement with the approval of the lessor, but shall restore the lease agreement to its original state at the expense of the lessee before the date of return of the real estate."

B. The Plaintiff received a total of KRW 18,500,000 from the Defendant from April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2014, and did not receive KRW 22,20,000.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, since the above lease contract has been terminated upon the expiration of the period, the defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the separate sheet, and shall pay to the plaintiff the unpaid rent of KRW 22,200,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as provided by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 7, 2014 to the day of full payment after the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case. The plaintiff shall be obligated to pay the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated at the rate of KRW 2,20,00 per month from September 30, 2014 to the day of completion of delivery of real estate

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserts that even though the building listed in the separate sheet was not operated as a leisure building for a long time, it was impossible to operate the building normally due to the defect of the building, the Plaintiff requested the reduction of the rent to reduce the rent by February 2, 2013, and that the rent was set at KRW 1,50,000 per month from May 2013.

However, there is no evidence to prove otherwise that the Defendant agreed to reduce the rent as above. Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2016.09.28 2016가단4555

-수원지방법원 2016.09.22 2016가단507860

-인천지방법원 2017.04.18 2017가합50842

-창원지방법원진주지원 2019.01.09 2018가단6316

-대구지방법원 2017.11.15 2017가단17549