(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.11 2016가단5073081

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.11 2016가단5073081

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the annex;

B. As from October 10, 2016, the delivery of the above real estate.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 28, 2015, the Plaintiffs leased real estate (hereinafter “instant building”) in attached Form (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant from October 28, 2015 to October 27, 2020, the lease deposit amount of KRW 60,000, the monthly rent of KRW 4,500,000 (excluding value-added tax), and the monthly rent of KRW 30,000 (excluding value-added tax), and the monthly rent of KRW 20,000 (excluding value-added tax).

B. The defendant did not pay monthly rent and management expenses to the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs terminated the lease contract of this case by delivering a copy of the complaint of this case to the defendant.

[Grounds for Recognition: Entry of Evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 7-2 of Evidence No. 1, 2-2, and purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated by the plaintiffs' declaration of termination due to the defendant's declaration of termination due to overdue delay, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiffs, and to pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from September 29, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the building of this case as claimed by the plaintiffs.

B. The Defendant’s assertion (1) is asserted to the effect that the Defendant is not liable for the rent after September 9, 2016, as the acquisition and succession agreement was reached between the new lessee and the new lessee on or around September 9, 2016, and the said agreement was impossible to recover the premium. However, in light of the written evidence No. 12 and the fact that the Defendant delayed payment of the rent for the instant building from the date of the instant lease agreement, the reasons alleged by the Defendant alone are the obligation to cooperate with the Plaintiffs in collecting the premium.

or prevent the plaintiffs from receiving premiums from new lessees.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원서부지원 2015.02.11 2014가단29425

-서울동부지방법원 2018.09.12 2017가단23265

-서울동부지방법원 2021.01.08 2020가합100244

-서울남부지방법원 2016.01.26 2015가단47857