logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.09.27 2019가단103430
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants deliver buildings listed in the attached list to the Defendants.

B. The Defendants jointly do so on August 26, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 15, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the building indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant store”) to Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) at KRW 2,000,000 monthly renting KRW 50,000 until December 14, 2019, and the lease deposit at KRW 50,000 (hereinafter “instant lease”).

B. On April 30, 2018, the Plaintiff agreed to sublease the instant store to Defendant D.

C. From August 26, 2018, the Defendants delayed the payment of rent for the instant store from August 26, 2018, and are also in arrears with management expenses from that time.

On December 4, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants that the lease contract for the instant building was terminated on the ground that the said rent was overdue.

[Reasons for Recognition] A: In the absence of dispute against the Defendant Company; entries in Gap evidence 1 through 11; the purport of the whole pleadings as to defendant D: Presumption of confession

2. According to the allegations and the facts found in the above findings, the instant lease agreement was terminated when the content certification of December 4, 2018, which included the Plaintiff’s declaration of termination on the grounds of the Defendants’ delinquency in rent, reaches the Defendants, or at least when the copy of the instant complaint was served on the Defendants.

As such, the Defendant Company, as the lessee, is obligated to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff as the sub-lessee, and the Defendants jointly have the obligation to pay the Plaintiff the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, calculated at the rate of KRW 2,00,000 per month from August 26, 2018 to the delivery date of the said store, starting from August 26, 2018 when the overdue period, was in place.

3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow