logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.03.13 2018가단231962
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. 20,800,000 won and June 21, 2018

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 20, 2017, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant on the first floor among the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract to change the entire real estate into an object (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) thereafter.

B. Under the instant lease agreement, the lease deposit was set at KRW 70 million (in the event of a contract, KRW 10 million within three months, KRW 40 million within six months, and KRW 20 million within six months), monthly rent was set at KRW 4.4 million (including additional taxes), and the lease period was from August 20, 2017 to August 20, 2019.

B. On August 20, 2017, the Defendant received the instant building from the Plaintiff, but paid only monthly rent of KRW 10 million out of the lease deposit to the Plaintiff until November 20, 2018.

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

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant was in arrears with three or more occasions, and the instant lease agreement was terminated on September 27, 2018 on the ground that the duplicate of the complaint of this case containing the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to terminate the contract was served on the Defendant on the grounds that the said duplicate was served on the Defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and is obligated to pay the Plaintiff rent of KRW 20,800,000 [=30,800,000 ( KRW 4,400,000) - Lease deposit of KRW 10,000] and the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 4,40,00 per month from June 21, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building].

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted as reasonable.

arrow