(영문) 대구지방법원안동지원 2016.01.27 2015가단2959

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) 대구지방법원안동지원 2016.01.27 2015가단2959

건물명도등

Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the land and building indicated in the attached list.

2. The defendant shall pay 31,200,000 won to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on June 28, 2013, setting the lease term from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2016 as to the land and buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”) owned by the Plaintiff, and then delivered the instant real estate to the Defendant at around that time (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”), and the Defendant did not fully pay the Plaintiff the rent to the Plaintiff after July 1, 2013. On June 12, 2015, the Plaintiff sent the Defendant a document verifying the content that the instant lease was terminated on the grounds that the lease was terminated on the grounds that the lease was unpaid.

Therefore, the instant lease agreement is deemed to have been terminated due to the Defendant’s second or more overdue delay, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and pay KRW 31,200,000 (= KRW 1,300,000 x 24 months) unpaid for the period from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2015, and to pay KRW 1,300,000 per month as unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from July 1, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the instant real estate.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to use the instant real estate as an object necessary for the waste disposal business at the time of the instant lease agreement. Under the Building Act, the Plaintiff is obligated to cancel various restrictions registration, such as seizure on August 9, 201 of the National Health Insurance Corporation, which was completed the instant real estate, seizure on May 27, 2013 of the Republic of Korea, and establishment registration of new energy around July 8, 201, which was the right to collateral security.

However, the plaintiff does not take measures to cancel the registration of restriction on rights.

참조조문

-건축법

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2016.11.17 2016가단106817

-인천지방법원부천지원 2016.01.22 2015가단19652

-창원지방법원 진주지원 2018.12.19 2018가단31343

-수원지방법원 2016.04.28 2015가단47200

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.06.29 2016가단1747