logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원장흥지원 2019.01.30 2018가단5462
토지인도
Text

1. The Defendant indicated in the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, which is established on the ground of 3,386.2 square meters of land for the farm in Jeonnam-gun, Jeonnam-gun.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around January 2003, the Plaintiff leased without deposit the rent of KRW 1.7 million per annum to the Defendant for the rent of KRW 3386,200,000 per annum, and the lease period from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2008.

(B) The contract for the above lease is called the "instant lease contract".

The Defendant occupied the instant land, and installed each plastic house (the sum of duns referred to as the “instant house”) such as the text on the ground as indicated above, and raised the original in that area.

C. On January 3, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to remove the instant Job and to request the Defendant to restore the instant land to its original state by June 30, 2014, on the ground that the instant lease agreement has expired due to the expiration of the period of validity.

On August 26, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease contract was terminated on the ground that the Defendant unilaterally paid the monthly rent of KRW 1.5 million to the Defendant.

E. From 2003 to 2013, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 1.5 million each year. From 2014, the Plaintiff refused to receive the said amount and deposited KRW 3 million each time on February 18, 2016 (the amount of KRW 2014, 2015), KRW 150,000 (the amount of KRW 2016), May 21, 2018 (the amount of KRW 2017), and KRW 1500,000 (the amount of KRW 2018) on December 27, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 8, 9, 10 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of on-site verification, the result of a request for surveying appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant lease agreement was terminated in accordance with the expiration of the period or the Plaintiff’s termination notice, the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant voucher to the Plaintiff, deliver the instant land, and pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the unpaid rent or rent.

B. Determination 1 sets the expiration date of the lease term in the instant lease agreement until December 31, 2008.

arrow