(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.10.18 2018가단215254

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) 서울서부지방법원 2018.10.18 2018가단215254

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant,

A. From KRW 4,00,000 to KRW 4,00,000, the annexed drawing among the buildings listed in the annexed list from August 31, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 19, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the part (A) of a stable, 300 square meters, and 9, 10, 11, 12, and 9 of the same drawings, among the buildings listed in the attached Table list, which are linked in sequence with the Defendant, with each point of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1, and 9, 10, 11, 12, and 9 of the same drawings, with respect to the lease deposit for the part (c) attached to the branch (hereinafter “instant real estate”), 30,000,000 won, monthly rent, 2,60,000 won (excluding value-added tax, 30 days after September 30, 2014), from September 30, 2014 to September 29, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The lease agreement was extended on June 16, 2017.

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant did not pay the remainder for three or more years since November 30, 2017, and the Plaintiff agreed to return the remainder after deducting it from the lease deposit by the expiration date of the instant lease agreement.

C. The Defendant has used and profit from the instant real estate until now, and the unpaid rent from November 30, 2017 to August 30, 2018, which is close to the closure date of the instant pleadings, is KRW 26,00,000 (=2,600,000 x 10 months).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 3-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, since the lease contract of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the period, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff and pay the unpaid rent and unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent.

However, if a lease contract is terminated, the lessor's obligation to return the lease deposit and the lessee's obligation to deliver the object is related to the simultaneous performance, and the lease deposit is secured by all the lessee's obligation, and the obligation, such as unjust enrichment and unjust enrichment, arising from the time the lease contract is terminated until the delivery of the object, should be deducted from the lease deposit

Therefore, it is true.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2015.09.18 2015가단11793

-수원지방법원 2015.08.25 2014가단63229

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.03.16 2017가단15355

-부산지방법원동부지원 2016.02.18 2015가단18604

-의정부지방법원 2016.07.07 2014가단41896