(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.10.22 2019나4537 | 리걸엔진

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) 창원지방법원 2020.10.22 2019나4537

임대료

Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

Of the instant lawsuits, the Plaintiff from April 4, 2019 to May 4, 2019.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 5, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) determined and leased to the Defendant the entire first and second floors of the first and second floors of concrete hub C located in Gyeong-gun (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at KRW 8 million, monthly rent of KRW 1 million; and (b) leased the instant real estate at KRW 1 million.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Defendant paid 7 million won out of the rent under the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiff.

C. On April 3, 2019, the Plaintiff settled in the following cases, including the delivery of buildings (No. 2018Kadan2235) by the Defendant and the Changwon District Court:

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff one million won each on May 3, 2019 and June 3, 2019, respectively, and deliver the instant real estate on June 5, 2019.

2. If the Defendant delays or fails to perform the duty of monetary payment as referred to in paragraph (1) a day, the Defendant shall immediately deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff.

3. On July 5, 2017, with respect to a lease agreement entered into between the Defendant and the instant real estate as a deposit amount of eight million won and one million won per month, the Plaintiff agreed upon the termination of the lease agreement and the delivery of the instant real estate thereafter, and two million won for two months from April 4, 2019 to June 3, 2019 by the Defendant’s possession and use of the instant real estate through the instant settlement. Other monetary disputes regarding the said lease agreement should be resolved separately.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The legality of the portion of the instant lawsuit claiming rent from April 4, 2019 to May 4, 2019

A. When a compromise in the relevant legal doctrine is entered in a protocol, that protocol has the same effect as that of a final and conclusive judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da25216, May 12, 1995). The same effect as that of a final and conclusive judgment recognized in such protocol is limited to the judgment on the existence of a legal relationship which is a subject matter of a lawsuit, and thus, concerning the legal relationship determined in the

참조판례

-대법원 1995. 5. 12. 선고 94다25216 판결

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2016.01.15 2015가단110493

-광주지방법원 2015.07.08 2015가단504245

-부산지방법원동부지원 2017.06.02 2016가합100132

-서울북부지방법원 2020.10.27 2019가단10795

-서울동부지방법원 2020.07.23 2020가단105853