logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.07.05 2016가단550017
건물명도
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 8, 2003, the Defendant entered into a contract on the lease of real estate (hereinafter “instant apartment”) listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) as constructed rental housing (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) from the Daegu Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Large Construction”), and continued to renew the said lease contract, and entered into an agreement on the termination of the said lease contract as follows.

Article 10 (Cancellation and Termination of Lease Contracts) (1) If the defendant commits an act falling under any of the following subparagraphs, he/she may cancel or terminate this contract, or refuse to renew the lease contract:

2. Article 13 of the former Rental Housing Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8966, Mar. 21, 2008) which was in force at the time of the instant lease agreement under Article 13 of the Rental Housing Act provides, “A lessee of a rental house shall neither transfer (including sale, donation, and all other acts accompanying the alteration of a right, but excluding inheritance) the right of lease nor sublease the rental house to any other person: Provided, That this shall not apply to cases prescribed by Presidential Decree, where an agreement of the rental business operator has been obtained.”

In case where he transfers the right of lease of a rental house to another person or subleases the rental house in contravention of the provisions.

B. On August 4, 2016, the Plaintiff purchased the instant apartment from Gwangju Construction, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 26, 201.

C. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant claiming that the Defendant terminated the instant lease agreement as the Defendant sub-leased the instant apartment to a third party, and the instant warden, which contained the Plaintiff’s intent of termination, was served on December 8, 2016 to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The cause of the action.

arrow