logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2019.10.17 2019가합10862
매매대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On November 1, 1996, the Plaintiff entered into a free loan agreement with the Defendant, and the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Party A, 991.5 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) for the purpose of building and operating the B straight board, with the aim of leasing the instant land from the Defendant, for the purpose of establishing and operating the B straight board.

On April 198, the Plaintiff newly constructed the building of the second floor steel-frame assembly and the assembly-type panel (hereinafter “instant building”) on the instant land and operated the B straight board building.

On December 20, 200, the Defendant concluded a loan agreement with the Plaintiff on the instant land at a cost, and the lease period from December 1, 2000 to November 30, 2001 was set at KRW 42,138,750.

On November 24, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a loan agreement with the land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay for development outlay for each year, and the loan fee for each year from December 1, 2016 to November 30, 2017 was determined as KRW 184,613,980.

(2) Article 9 of the loan agreement of this case on December 20, 200, including the loan agreement of the land secured for recompense of development outlay as above (hereinafter referred to as "the loan agreement of this case") provides that "if the loan period expires or the contract of this case is terminated, the plaintiff shall restore the loan property to its original state within the period designated by the defendant and return it in the presence of the defendant." Article 9 of the loan agreement of this case dated November 24, 2016 provides that "if the loan period expires or the contract of this case is terminated, the loan property shall be restored to its original state within the period designated by the plaintiff and returned in the presence of the

(2) On November 2, 2017, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to extend the instant loan agreement by November 30, 2018. However, on November 30, 2017, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a public notice to the effect that the instant loan agreement will be extended only until February 28, 2018.

2.3

arrow