(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.06 2017가단5233446

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 2018.09.06 2017가단5233446

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) holidaying three floors of 104.89 square meters among the buildings listed in the attached list;

(b) (1) 24,200,000; and

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 13, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 20 million to Nonparty C, and paid KRW 104.89 square meters (hereinafter “the leased part of this case”) on the third floor among the commercial buildings listed in the attached Table owned by Nonparty C (hereinafter “instant building”) on its ownership (hereinafter “instant building”) shall be one year (from June 13, 2016 to June 12, 2017) for the lease term of one year (from June 13, 2016 to June 12, 2017), and after the lease of KRW 2420,00 (including additional taxes, and payment on June 25, 201) for the rent monthly (hereinafter “the lease of this case”), and completed the registration of business in the leased part, and thereafter, the lease of this case was legally renewed after the lease term.

C It is not peeped that the Defendant was notified of the refusal to renew or change the terms and conditions between six months and one month before the expiration of the lease term of this case. It is reasonable to view that the lease term of this case was legally renewed pursuant to Article 10(4) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act on June 12, 2017 when the initial contract term expires.

B. Nonparty D, who purchased the instant building from C, decided to succeed to the lessor status of the instant lease, completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant building on June 30, 2017, simultaneously with the completion of the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

C. The Defendant did not pay the monthly rent from March 2017 with respect to the lease of this case. The Plaintiff, who succeeded to the lessor status of the instant building, succeeded to the lessor status of the instant building pursuant to Article 3(2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.

The lease of this case was terminated through the service of a copy of the complaint of this case on the grounds of the defendant's delay for more than three years.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.

참조조문

-상가건물 임대차보호법

-상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제2항

-상가건물 임대차보호법 제10조 제4항

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.02.19 2019가단549506

-대구지방법원김천지원 2016.12.22 2016가단5371

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.18 2015가단5277404

-창원지방법원 진주지원 2017.01.12 2016가단30988