(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.05.24 2016가단62964

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) 울산지방법원 2017.05.24 2016가단62964

임대차보증금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,80,000 and 15% per annum from August 17, 2016 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. In fact, on November 2009, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant on the lease deposit amount of KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 200,000,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

The Plaintiff paid a lease deposit of KRW 30 million to the Defendant and resided in the instant officetel upon delivery. On December 22, 2013, the Plaintiff delivered an officetel to the Defendant.

At the time when the Plaintiff delivers the instant officetel, the rent in arrears is KRW 9.2 million.

[Reasons for Recognition] The fact that the plaintiff was the plaintiff, Gap 1-5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder amount of KRW 20.8 million calculated by deducting the Plaintiff’s delayed rent of KRW 9.2 million from the deposit for lease deposit of KRW 30 million and to pay the Plaintiff 15% interest per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 17, 2016 following the day of service of the application for the instant payment order to the day of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.

2. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion that since the rent stipulated in the lease contract of this case is KRW 300,000 per month and the period during which the plaintiff delayed to pay the rent is 46 months, the defendant's assertion that the sum of overdue rent of KRW 13.8 million ( KRW 3 million x 46 months) should be deducted from the lease deposit of this case to be returned by the defendant.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's assertion, and this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

Next, the defendant asserts that since the defendant paid 7,560,000 won to repair the damaged floor upon delivery of the instant officetel from the plaintiff, 7,560,000 won should be deducted from the deposit money for lease of this case to be returned by the defendant.

However, Eul evidence alone destroyed and delivered the instant officetel floor by the Plaintiff.

or the defendant's objection.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2019.04.05 2018나3582

-서울남부지방법원 2016.09.07 2015가단62412

-청주지방법원충주지원 2019.03.21 2018가합5782

-서울서부지방법원 2018.11.27 2018가단217267

-수원지방법원 2016.09.27 2015나32148