(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.15 2018나47327

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 2019.05.15 2018나47327

가옥명도등 등 청구의 소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in Gap evidence No. 1-2 as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff’s lease on July 21, 2015, with the lease deposit of KRW 3.5 million, monthly rent of KRW 200,000 (payment on July 21, 2015), and the lease deposit of KRW 3.5 million from July 21, 2015 to July 20, and the lease deposit of KRW 3.5 million from the Defendant on the same day.

According to the above facts, the above lease contract was terminated at the expiration of the term.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and to pay the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, calculated at the rate of KRW 200,000 per month from June 21, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the instant real estate, as sought by the Plaintiff.

2. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant paid the rent to the Plaintiff by February 21, 2018, and the Plaintiff, on the other hand, caused mental, material, and physical damage to the Defendant, and thus, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff should be paid the lease deposit amount of KRW 3.5 million, remodeling cost of KRW 2 million, director expenses, hospital expenses, etc. from the Plaintiff.

However, as seen earlier, in accordance with the above lease agreement, the Plaintiff’s claim for rent of KRW 200,000 per month occurs. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant paid the rent, as alleged by the Defendant, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant’s refund was entirely deducted from the rent.

In addition, as alleged by the defendant, the defendant spent remodeling costs.

There is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff suffered any damage to the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's above argument is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim should be accepted on the ground of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justified on the ground of its conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the defendant's appeal.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원남원지원 2020.03.25 2019가단1375

-수원지방법원 2019.07.10 2018나83932

-부산지방법원 2016.06.03 2015나12601

-부산지방법원 2016.09.08 2016가단15644

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.08 2019가단5316123