logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.08.23 2016가단245794
건물명도
Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are dismissed, respectively.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 10, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant to lease (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) the part (i) on the ship (hereinafter “instant store”) (hereinafter “instant store”) that connects each point of 1,2,3,4, and 1 on the first floor floor of the building indicated in the attached list to the Defendant, with the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1300,000,000, and the lease period of KRW 1300,000,000,000 from August 19, 2011.

B. The instant lease agreement was implicitly renewed and extended. On May 2, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant proof that “the instant lease agreement has expired on August 18, 2016, and no longer wishes to extend the lease.”

C. On May 11, 2016, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate stating that “The Plaintiff would actively cooperate in collecting the premium as a new lessee from three months prior to the end of the lease pursuant to Article 10-4 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (on May 18, 2016) to the end of the lease (on August 16, 2016).” The Plaintiff sent a proof of the details of the lessor’s request regarding the arrangement of a new lessee as follows.

The type of business of a new lessee shall be the same as the present and the category of business such as beauty stores, etc.

On the other hand, the types of business using firearms such as restaurants, the types of business that cause smelling food, and entertainment business places are the time of damage.

원고는 2011. 3. 17. 피고와 이 사건 점포에 관하여 임대차계약을 체결한 이후 현재까지 5년 동안 한 차례도 월차임을 인상하지 아니하였는바, 그 동안 주위 상점의 임대료 시세는 꾸준히 인상되어, 현재 이 사건 점포의 임대차 보증금, 월차임은 현 시점의 시세와 상당히 격차가 큽니다.

Therefore, the plaintiff is located in a location similar to the store of this case (a location opposite to each other in a distance width or its neighboring commercial buildings).

arrow