(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.10.23 2015가단17877

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) 서울동부지방법원 2015.10.23 2015가단17877

건물명도 등

Text

1. The Defendants, among the first floor of the attached list of the real estate listed in the attached list, will provide each Plaintiff with indication 1, 2, 3, 4, 1.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

On February 18, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million (including value-added tax), KRW 1320,000,000 monthly rent (including value-added tax), and KRW 1320,000,000 on February 17, 201, and thereafter, delivered the instant store at around that time.

Defendant B, by transferring the instant store to Defendant C without the Plaintiff’s consent, is currently running the business by currently Defendant C possessing the instant store.

Defendant B did not pay the monthly rent after March 18, 2014. The Plaintiff terminated the said lease contract on the grounds of overdue rent, transfer without permission, or sub-lease for at least two years through the instant complaint, and the instant complaint was served on Defendant B on June 17, 2015.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1-3's descriptions and the purport of the whole pleadings.

Judgment

According to the above facts, since the above lease contract was lawfully terminated on the grounds of the sub-lease and transfer of Defendant B without permission and the delinquency in the second period, Defendant B is obligated to return to the duty of restitution pursuant to the lease contract, upon the Plaintiff’s request by the Plaintiff who exercises the right to claim the exclusion of interference with the ownership, Defendant C is obligated to deliver the instant store to each Plaintiff, and Defendant B is deemed to continue to occupy and use the instant store even after the termination of the contract. Thus, Defendant B is obligated to pay the unpaid monthly rent and unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent calculated at the rate of 1320,000 won from March 19, 2014 to the completion of delivery of the instant store.

In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and all of them are accepted.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2019.01.15 2018가단26031

-서울북부지방법원 2017.06.13 2016가단41019

-서울북부지방법원 2017.06.27 2017가단3762

-서울동부지방법원 2015.05.22 2014가단133642

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.01.16 2016가단80028