logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.01.11 2016가단81273
건물인도 등 청구의 소
Text

1. From 15,00,000 to 12,000 won, the Defendant shall deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet from July 12, 2016 to 15,000.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The facts as stated in the grounds for the attachment of the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged according to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and all pleadings.

B. According to the above facts finding, it is reasonable to view that the lease contract on the instant real estate was lawfully terminated due to the Defendant’s delinquency in rent, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and to pay the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 5,00,000,000, which is overdue from February 2, 2016 to June 2016, and from July 12, 2016 to the delivery date of the instant real estate, calculated at the rate of KRW 1,00,000,000 per month.

2. As to the defendant's defense, the defendant, after deducting the rent close to the plaintiff and notifying the plaintiff of the refund of the remaining lease deposit. This constitutes a simultaneous performance defense, and the defendant paid KRW 20,000 as the lease deposit with respect to the real estate in this case, and the fact that the lease contract on the real estate in this case has been terminated is as seen earlier. Thus, the plaintiff is obligated to refund the lease deposit to the defendant, and the above lease deposit return is in concurrent performance relation with the defendant's duty of delivery of the real estate in this case.

On the other hand, since the rent and unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent claimed by the plaintiff should be naturally deducted from the above lease deposit, the defendant's simultaneous performance defense is justified within the scope of the deducted money.

Therefore, the Defendant deducts the remainder amount of KRW 5,00,000,000, which was overdue from the Plaintiff from February 12, 2016 to June 2016, from the remainder of KRW 15,000,000 (=20,000 - 5,000,000). From July 12, 2016 to the delivery date of the instant real estate, the Defendant deducted unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated at the rate of KRW 1,00,00 per month.

arrow