(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.01.24 2012가합545184

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 2014.01.24 2012가합545184

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. (i) The Plaintiff leased an apartment (No. 429 and 432) and a shop for commercial buildings (No. 104) in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Building Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Defendant Dong video Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) and operated a food ingredients supply business in the relevant apartment building until around 2006.

The defendant company has leased the first and second floors of the building of this case as commercial buildings, and the third and fifth floors as apartment buildings.

B. The building of this case was built in 1973 and was judged to have a risk of disaster due to collapse as a result of the precise safety diagnosis in 1995, and the head of Gangnam-gu, upon leaving the Defendant company around August 1996, ordered the removal, reconstruction, construction and repair of the building.

Around November 1996, Defendant Company requested the entire occupants of the building of this case to “a store and apartment lease agreement shall not be extended until December 31, 1996.” In the process, Defendant Company agreed with a large number of lessees on the following terms: “a shop and apartment contract shall not be extended until December 31, 1996,” and “a large number of lessees shall be given a right to priority occupancy after the completion of the building, grant a right to priority occupancy after the completion of the building, and discount of 20% of the rent.” The agreed lessee shall be paid KRW 2 million for moving expenses, and the tenant who refused the agreement shall be requested to refuse to renew the lease agreement and deliver the leased object several times until the year 205.

In the process, the head of Gangnam-gu urged the defendant company to remove and repair cars.

B. (i) The Defendant Company filed a lawsuit seeking the delivery of a store, etc. against some of the occupants of the Plaintiff, etc. who refused to comply with India for the first time in 2006 (Seoul Central District Court 2005Gahap75946) and the lease contract on June 29, 2006 was terminated on July 11, 2005.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2019.06.13 2019가단2624

-부산고등법원 2018.04.12 2017나49

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.26 2015가합503181

-서울동부지방법원 2015.05.22 2012가단68966

-광주지방법원순천지원 2015.01.28 2014가합1264