logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.02.14 2017가단207149
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The Defendant points out to the Plaintiff each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the real estate listed in the attached Table list (1st 78.45 square meters).

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the building indicated in the order (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. Around June 2016, the Defendant received repair expenses from the Plaintiff, and had the Plaintiff repaired the instant building, and had the Plaintiff sell it, and thereafter had been residing in the instant building from that time.

C. On November 29, 2016, the Plaintiff issued a letter of loan for use to the Defendant for the purpose of having the Plaintiff submit the instant building to the community service center.

On July 12, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment and a fine of 3.5 million won by taking advantage of the fact that the Plaintiff acquired 3.5 million won by deception from the Plaintiff on July 12, 2017 and prepared a package contract while selling real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 1, Eul No. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with the Defendant for use of the instant building; however, in light of the background leading up to the conclusion of the loan agreement with the Plaintiff and the circumstances where the trust or friendship relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was weak, it is reasonable to recognize the right to terminate the contract to the Plaintiff from the perspective of fairness.

Therefore, the loan contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated upon the Plaintiff’s exercise of the Plaintiff’s right to terminate the contract by serving a duplicate of the complaint of this case or a written application for change of the cause of claim on September 26, 2017. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and accepted.

arrow