beta
Text
1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:
(a) Attached 1 2 Map 1, 2, 3, 4, 1-1, located on the ground of the land listed in the annexed Table 1 list.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 2005, the Plaintiffs’ father E entered into a lease agreement for the purpose of growing crops (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant’s father F by setting the rent of KRW 3,000,000 per annum and the lease period from March 2005 to March 2008 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Since March 2008, F agreed to remove the vinyl house or return the vinyl house to E at the request of E.
E transferred the instant land to F around that time.
B. On May 29, 2012, the Plaintiffs, who were their wife G and their children, agreed to inherit 1/3 shares of each of the instant land. On October 31, 2012, the Plaintiffs completed the registration of transfer of 1/3 shares on the instant land on October 31, 2012 due to inheritance by consultation or division.
In addition, the Plaintiffs succeeded to the status of lessor of the network E on the instant land, and the Defendant succeeded to the status of F’s lessee.
C. On July 29, 2014, the Plaintiffs refused to renew the instant lease agreement, and notified the Defendant that the instant lease agreement will be terminated on July 29, 2015, by granting a grace period of one year to the Defendant. On June 30, 2015, the Plaintiffs notified the Defendant that the instant land should be restored to its original state immediately after the lease period expires.
On the other hand, the Defendant’s land of this case is ordered
A. (1) As described in paragraph (1), a vinyl shall be installed in the said section as described in the said sub-paragraph (a), a sandd position panel shall be installed in the vinyl, a movable property, such as agricultural machinery, etc., shall be installed, and the land of this case shall be occupied while cultivating crops in each of the above vinyl houses until now.
2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the instant lease was terminated on July 29, 2015 after the expiration of the period of validity.
Therefore, the defendant is a vinyl with the plaintiffs on the ground of the land of this case, unless there are special circumstances.