logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.05.22 2019나59922
건물인도등
Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 2,089,168.

Reasons

Any counterclaim filed in the principal lawsuit and the trial court shall also be deemed to be a counterclaim.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the store listed in attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant store”). On September 9, 2009, the Plaintiff stated KRW 10,000,000 as to the instant store with the Defendant, and KRW 620,000 as lease deposit, monthly rent (including management fees) and KRW 610,000 as to the instant lease agreement, but it appears that the Defendant would pay KRW 620,000 per month in addition to the management fees of KRW 10,000.

From September 25, 2009 to September 24, 2011, a lease contract was concluded (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) and the Defendant paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff and used it.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant continued to renew the above lease agreement. From October 2015 (the monthly difference between September 25, 2015 and October 24, 2015), the Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to increase the said lease agreement to KRW 800,000 per month.

C. On November 13, 2018, the Plaintiff sent a document verifying the content to the Defendant, and notified the termination of the instant lease agreement on the ground of the delinquency in rent.

On June 28, 2019, the Defendant delivered the instant store to the Plaintiff.

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

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. The first instance judgment on the claim for the delivery of the instant store ordered the Defendant to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff, and as seen earlier, the Defendant delivered the said store to the Plaintiff on June 28, 2019, which later, the part seeking the delivery of the said store among the Plaintiff’s principal claim is without merit.

B. The portion of the claim for monetary payment 1) The decision on the grounds of the claim (the defendant's defense of payment is judged as follows);

(A) The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (i) the unpaid rent of KRW 7,300,000 and the delay damages therefor; and (ii) the date of delivery of the instant store from December 26, 2018 to December 25, 200.

arrow