logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.04.29 2016가단650
건물인도
Text

1. From 15,00,000 to 15,000 won, the Defendant indicated from April 20, 2016 to 5,6.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 28, 2007, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the [Attachment Table 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, and 5] list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,000,000, and September 20, 2009.

B. The Defendant paid the above lease deposit and thereafter operated the beauty art room after receiving delivery of the building of this case from the Plaintiff.

C. From December 2, 2012 to April 2013, the Defendant delayed the payment of the rent for five months, and the Plaintiff deducted KRW 5,000,000 from the lease deposit the Defendant’s overdue rent from the lease deposit.

The instant warden served the Defendant on January 22, 2016, stating that the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the ground of the Defendant’s delayed delay.

E. The Defendant paid rent to the Plaintiff by March 20, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated according to the plaintiff's declaration of termination on the ground of the defendant's delayed delay.

B. Therefore, as requested by the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to receive from the Plaintiff the amount calculated by deducting the amount calculated by the rate of KRW 1,000,000 from the deposit 15,000,000 (the first lease deposit 20,000,000 - the overdue rent of KRW 5,00,000) to the delivery date of the building of this case from April 20, 2016 to the delivery date of the building of this case, and simultaneously deliver the building of this case to the Plaintiff.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow