(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.03.24 2014가단32699

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) 광주지방법원 2015.03.24 2014가단32699

건물명도 등

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver real estate indicated in the annexed real estate;

B. From September 9, 2013, as above.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the overall purport of the arguments in each of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 4-1, and Eul evidence No. 2

(1) On November 15, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 25,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,980,00 (including value-added tax) and the lease term of KRW 1,980,00 with respect to the building indicated on the attached real estate owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”).

(2) The Defendant did not pay as monthly rent from September 9, 2013 when occupying and using the instant building.

(3) Accordingly, on April 17, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the said lease agreement.

B. According to the facts of the above recognition, since the above lease contract between the plaintiff and the defendant is terminated by the plaintiff's lawful termination, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, and the defendant is obligated to pay the amount calculated by the ratio of KRW 1,980,000 from September 9, 2013 to the completion date of delivery of the building of this case.

2. The defendant alleged that the defendant's assertion is offset against the plaintiff's claim, since the interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior decoration works, electrical pressure works, toilet repair works, and drainage facilities works, etc. for the building of this case, the defendant's assertion that the necessary or beneficial expenses should be refunded from the plaintiff. However, since there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's allegation, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2021.04.21 2021가단2891

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.07.19 2018가단1690

-수원지방법원 2020.10.15 2020가단516779

-수원지방법원 2017.09.22 2016나66964

-인천지방법원부천지원 2015.10.16 2015가단15568