(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.04.03 2017가단129459

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) 서울북부지방법원 2018.04.03 2017가단129459

건물인도

Text

1. The defendant

(a) Of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, each point is indicated in the annexed sheet (1), (2), (3), (4), and (1);

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 4, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the following terms: (a) the first floor store underground (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of real estate indicated in the attached list owned by the Defendant; and (b) handed over the instant real estate to the Defendant.

1) A lease deposit: A lease period of KRW 900,00 (excluding surtax, KRW 14,000 on the 15th day of each month): From October 15, 2017 to October 15, 2019: In cases where a lease contract of KRW 20,000 (excluding public charges other than water charges, on the 5th day of each month) is terminated, the lessee shall restore to the original state and return to the lessor, and the lessee shall be obliged to restore to the original state when the annual rent of the facility reaches the amount of three-year rent, the lessor may terminate the lease immediately.

B. The Defendant paid the rent of KRW 990,000,000 until May 14, 2017, and thereafter, the Defendant was in arrears.

C. On November 29, 2017, a duplicate of the complaint of this case was served on the Defendant to the effect that the above lease contract is terminated on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent.

[Reasons for Recognition] The remarkable facts, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the above lease contract was terminated by the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff and pay the overdue rent and water fee.

3. Judgment on the defense

A. The Defendant did not have a duty to pay rent because he could not operate a Korean-style store in the instant real estate. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant should compensate the Defendant for operating damages, including KRW 5 million for the director’s expenses, KRW 5 million for the purchase of air, KRW 1,500,000 for the purchase of cryr, KRW 1,500,000 for the purchase of cryr, KRW 3,500,000 for real estate, KRW 3,500,000 for the premium, KRW 1,50,000 for the restoration team, and KRW 1,50,000 for

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.13 2018가단5025253

-수원지방법원성남지원 2015.07.07 2015가단6462

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.05 2020가단5195094

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.28 2018나23833

-서울남부지방법원 2020.07.14 2020가단204920