logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.08.22 2017가단25681
건물명도
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the annex sheet;

(b)payment of KRW 8,900,000;

C. December 2017

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a lessor of a building listed in the attached list, and the defendant is a lessee.

B. On December 15, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming delivery of a building on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent (Seoul Eastern District Court 2016Da3981), and on April 7, 2017, the conciliation between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant conciliation”) was established as follows.

① The Defendant shall pay 10,200,000 won to the Plaintiff by July 15, 2017, and shall pay 15% delay damages for the unpaid amount.

② On July 16, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant enter into a lease agreement with KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,400,000 (Additional Tax Table).

C. The Defendant paid KRW 8,820,00 to the Plaintiff by July 26, 2017 according to the instant conciliation, but did not pay the remainder and KRW 1,540,000 (including surtax) as from July 16, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 12, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the defendant did not pay rent, it is obligated to deliver the building listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff, and pay the unpaid amount of KRW 1,200,000 ( KRW 10,020,000 - KRW 8,820,000) out of the amount following the instant adjustment, and to pay the difference by the rate of KRW 1,540,000 per month from July 16, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the building listed in the separate sheet.

B. The Defendant paid KRW 9,620,000 to the Plaintiff according to the instant conciliation, and the remaining money was intended to be paid at the time of entering into a lease agreement, but failed to pay the Plaintiff due to the lack of contact, so the Plaintiff’s claim of this case was unlawful. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the Defendant’s assertion is

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.

arrow