logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.28 2020나29797
손해배상(기)
Text

The part against the plaintiff falling under the amount ordered to be paid under the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 20, 2017, the Plaintiff, from the Defendant, leased (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) the 3, 4, and 5 floors above the ground of the building in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, for the purpose of operating the publicly notified source by setting the lease deposit of KRW 110 million, monthly rent of KRW 900,000,000, and the lease period from August 15, 2017 to August 14, 2019, operated the publicly notified source from August 15, 2017 (hereinafter “instant publicly notified source”).

B. During the period when the Plaintiff operated the Gosiwon, water leakage (hereinafter “the instant water leakage”) occurred in the part of the Gosiwon. On December 2018, the Plaintiff received KRW 20 million premium from D, a lessee, after having decided to terminate the instant lease agreement with the Defendant, and transferred the instant Gosiwon to D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 7, Eul evidence No. 1 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time of the Plaintiff’s operation of the instant public notice board, the Defendant did not perform its repair obligation despite the fact that water leakage was generated on the outer wall of the building due to the deterioration of the fiveth floor and the building, and as a result, the Plaintiff did not lease ten rooms among the instant public notice board for five months, thereby suffering from property damage of KRW 15 million [=3 million (monthly deposit fee) x 10 million x 5 months x 5 months], and suffered from mental distress due to water leakage. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay damages to the Plaintiff, 5 million won, consolation money for the Plaintiff’s property damage, 5 million won, and delay damages.

B. Since the Plaintiff’s failure to properly manage the leased building of this case, the number of copies incurred in the Defendant’s Notification Board cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim.

3. Determination

A. 1) A lessor is obligated to maintain the leased object as necessary for use and profit-making (Civil Act).

arrow