(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.05.25 2017가단2455

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) 대전지방법원 2017.05.25 2017가단2455

건물명도 등

Text

1. The Defendant shall deliver the real estate indicated in the attached Form to the Plaintiff, and from February 1, 2017 to the date of delivery of the said real estate.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the instant warehouse. On March 5, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement by setting the lease deposit of KRW 22,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,800,000 (payment on March 1) and the lease term from March 5, 2016 to March 4, 2018.

B. The Defendant did not pay the rent from July 1, 2016 when receiving delivery of the instant warehouse. At that time, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to pay the rent in arrears and notified the Defendant of the termination of the lease.

C. On January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff served with the Daejeon District Court 2017TTTTTT 384 claims and collection orders regarding the claim for the refund of the lease deposit against the instant warehouse held by the Defendant against the Plaintiff. On January 19, 2017, the Plaintiff returned KRW 12,60,000 from the lease deposit to the 22,00,000 on July 1, 2016, the sum of the unpaid rent from July 1, 2016 to the 12,66,760 on the aggregate of the unpaid electricity charges for December 2016 and January 2017; KRW 17,450 on the aggregate of the water supply charges for December 2016, and KRW 17,450 on the storage of this case; KRW 30,075,070 on the remainder of the storage of this case; and KRW 305,0750 on the deposit and the remainder of the storage of this case;

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap 1 through 10 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the warehouse of this case was terminated by the Plaintiff’s notice of termination on the ground of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent.

In addition, in light of the fact that the defendant asserts that the deposit remaining as the plan to use until the contract term remains, it is appropriate to determine that the defendant currently occupies and uses the warehouse of this case.

Therefore, the lease contract was terminated.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.04.19 2017가단11080

-대구지방법원 2019.04.04 2018나318875

-인천지방법원 2018.12.20 2018가단12567

-창원지방법원 2020.06.30 2019가단104764

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.07.19 2016가단3679