logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.02.14 2016나1425
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 11, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the 101 lecture room of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant lecture room”) and the 102 office office of the branch floor (hereinafter “instant office”) of the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”). From April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 10 million from April 18, 2013 to KRW 2 years from the lease term of the instant lecture room and the instant office (hereinafter “instant office”).

Article 1 subparag. 1 of the instant lease agreement provides that “Monthly management expenses shall be the amount determined by the management office,” and Article 1 of the special agreement provides that “management expenses shall be borne by the lessee from the date of occupancy, and the rules and management rules of the management body (hereinafter “the management rules of this case”) shall apply.”

The Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement.

Meanwhile, Article 74(1) of the Management Rules of this case provides that "a management authority may issue a demand note if the occupants, etc. fail to pay the management expenses, etc.," and Article 74(2) provides that "a management authority may take the following measures against the households in arrears who have failed to pay the fees, etc. included in the management expenses, even after

1. Suspension of air-conditioning operation;

2. Suspension of parking;

3. Suspension of the supply of electricity;

4. The Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a written agreement concerning the instant lease (hereinafter “instant agreement”) on December 31, 2013. Article 1 of the instant agreement provides that “The Plaintiff shall deliver to the Defendant the instant real estate currently being used and used until April 18, 2014.”

Article 3 provides that “The instant case used during that period.”

arrow