(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.29 2014가단123697

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.29 2014가단123697

건물명도 등

Text

1. The Defendants’ respective Plaintiff

A. From 60,000,000 to 60,000, the buildings listed in the separate sheet from May 22, 2014.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 7, 2014, the Plaintiff’s monthly rent of KRW 60,000 (=5,500,000) is equivalent to KRW 550,000 (5,500,000) considering the following: (a) from February 22, 2014 to February 21, 2015, the lease deposit amount of KRW 60,000; and (b) the rent of KRW 5,500,000 (Additional Tax) between the Defendants and the Defendants.

On February 22, 2014, the building of this case was delivered to the Defendants on February 22, 2014, after concluding a lease agreement with the terms of payment on the 22th of each month with the payment of rent, and received KRW 60,000,000 from the Defendants.

B. The Defendants paid KRW 5,500,000, out of the rent of KRW 6,050,000 from February 22, 2014 to March 21, 2014, to the Plaintiff with respect to the rent under the said lease agreement, on April 16, 2014, which was due on March 22, 2014, the rent of KRW 550,000 for the remainder of the said period and the rent of KRW 550,00 for the period from March 22, 2014 to May 21, 2014.

C. On June 9, 2014, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the said lease agreement to the Defendants on the grounds that the said lease is unpaid.

After all, the Defendants paid KRW 6,600,000 on June 20, 2014, and KRW 6,050,000 on July 24, 2014, with respect to the unpaid rent to the Plaintiff, and did not pay the remainder. The Defendants have occupied and used the instant building until now.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. (1) According to the judgment on the request for the delivery of a building, the defendants delayed the payment of rent for the building of this case three times. Thus, the above lease agreement was lawfully terminated upon the plaintiff's declaration of termination on June 9, 2014 on the ground that the above delay was caused.

Therefore, the defendants shall restore the plaintiff to their original state following the termination of the above lease contract.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2015.09.17 2015가합2997

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.01.30 2016가단7847

-대구지방법원 2018.05.01 2017가단122663

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.12 2016가단5135521

-수원지방법원안양지원 2017.09.01 2016가단115508