logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.09.05 2019가합31580
임차보증금반환청구 등
Text

1. As to KRW 310,00,000 among the Plaintiff and KRW 300,000,000, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10,000 from March 12, 2019.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 14, 2018, the Plaintiff leased, from the Defendant, the Yongsan-gu Seoul metropolitan apartment unit D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with the deposit deposit of KRW 300 million (the down payment of KRW 30 million), monthly rent of KRW 800,000,000 from January 24, 2019 to January 23, 2021 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. Article 2 of the instant lease agreement provides, “The lessor shall deliver the instant apartment to the lessee by January 24, 2019, in a condition that it can use and benefit from the apartment for the purpose of the lease,” and Article 8 of the same Act provides, “If the lessee or lessee fails to perform the contractual terms and conditions, the other party may demand the nonperformance to perform the contract and rescind the contract. Furthermore, a person who has failed to perform the contractual terms and conditions may claim damages arising from the cancellation of the contract, and a down payment shall be deemed as the basis for compensation for damages, unless otherwise agreed.”

C. In the terms and conditions of the instant lease agreement, the lessor stipulates that “The lessee shall accept the entire amount of the loan (including a written estimate).”

In accordance with the above special agreement, the Defendant constructed an artificial apartment in this case from January 9, 2019 to January 23, 2019.

On January 24, 2019, the Plaintiff paid a deposit of KRW 300 million to the Defendant, and moved into the apartment of this case along with his/her spouse and his/her two marrieds (7,5 slaughters). On the ground that symptoms, such as smelling of severe chemical drugs in the head of a house, house-to-door stuff, etc., such as gymnasium, gymnasium, and gymnasium, have been demanding the Defendant to continue taking measures

E. However, the Defendant did not take any particular measures while having no problem with the instant apartment and the artificial park construction.

Accordingly, the plaintiff voluntarily snicks in order to snack the smells, and booms them with both sides in each room.

arrow