(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.01.10 2016가단23110

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) 대전지방법원 2017.01.10 2016가단23110

건물명도 등

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Attached Form

1. Attached Form among 35.9 square meters of one story of a building indicated in the indication;

2. Each of the drawings indication 1, 2, 9, 8, and 1.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant around September 2008 attached Form

1. Attached Form among 35.9 square meters of one story of a building indicated in the indication;

2. The Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with respect to the size of 10,00 square meters on board (A) part (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”) that connects each point of the drawing Nos. 1, 2, 9,8, and 1 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”) with respect to the leased object, with no fixed period of 50,000 square meters per month (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”), and the Defendant paid a rent by June 30, 201 and did not pay a rent thereafter. On July 19, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant proof that the instant lease agreement was terminated on the ground of the Defendant’s default on rent, and the content certification that the Plaintiff reached the Defendant may be recognized by the lack of dispute between the parties, or by taking into account the entire purport of pleading as a whole in the statement No. 2.

B. According to the above facts, the instant lease agreement was terminated on or around July 19, 2016, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the leased object of this case to the Plaintiff, and ② pay the unpaid rent or the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent not paid at the rate of KRW 50,00 per month from July 1, 2011 to the completion date of delivery of the leased object of this case, starting from July 1, 2011 to July 1.

2. On July 201, the Defendant’s defense to the effect that the Defendant was exempted from all the obligation to pay rent under the instant lease agreement from the Plaintiff on or around July 201, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant was exempted from the obligation to pay rent from the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant’s defense cannot be accepted.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2018.06.19 2017가단27107

-인천지방법원부천지원 2019.10.16 2019가단13577

-제주지방법원 2016.06.28 2016가단3262

-인천지방법원부천지원 2016.01.27 2015가단20881

-인천지방법원부천지원 2014.06.24 2013가단24636