logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.07.11 2016나39204
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant and the incidental costs of appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 17, 1998, the InternationalJ owned 2/8 shares, K 3/8 shares, and E 1/8 shares, respectively.

(hereinafter above I, J, K, and E collectively referred to as the "co-owners of this case"

The co-owners of this case obtained lease profit by leasing part of the above building to a third party, but L was operated by leasing part of the second floor of the above building to singing.

(hereinafter referred to as “the part of the above buildings operated by singing” is the instant store (hereinafter referred to as “the instant store”).

On May 28, 2015, the instant co-owners sold to G the entire three-story buildings including H-243 square meters in Mapo-gu Seoul and the instant store, and G sold on June 12, 2015 the entire three-story buildings on the said land and the instant three-story buildings, and on June 12, 2015, G established a right to lease on a deposit basis with the Defendant as to the entire land and the instant three-story buildings until June 9, 2020, to comprehensively transfer the right to use and benefit from the entire building including the instant store, and the Defendant came to have the lessor’s status as to the entire building including the instant store.

On the other hand, from June 2012, F operated a singing room at the instant store. On March 18, 2016, F refused to comply with the notification given by the Defendant to increase the deposit and monthly rent of the instant store. On April 28, 2016, Singing facilities discontinued business without being kept as it was and removed, and notified the Defendant of the password of the instant store entrance.

E. From June 2016 to July 2016, the Defendant removed the instant store’s singing room facilities and performed interior works. At its expense, the Defendant spent KRW 9,770,000 (the money’s KRW 1,000 appears to be the transfer fee).

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, 4, 5 (including branch numbers in case of provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 4 and 13, testimony of the witness F of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the parties' arguments.

arrow