logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 논산지원 2018.11.22 2018가단2182
건물명도 등
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

(b)payment of KRW 2,550,000;

C. September 2018

Reasons

Description of Claim

On April 14, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) leased a building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 3 million; (b) KRW 250,000 per month; and (c) year for a period of one; and (d) concluded a special agreement that the lessor may terminate the lease contract if the lessee fails to pay the rent for at least two years.

On April 17, 2018, the Plaintiff increased the term of lease to KRW 300,000 per month between the Defendant and the Defendant, and extended the term of lease to April 17, 2019.

However, the Defendant did not pay the rent from January 17, 2018. Accordingly, on July 13, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the lease contract will be terminated on the grounds of the rent delay, and the notification was delivered to the Defendant.

Therefore, since the above lease contract was terminated upon termination, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff to its original state.

In addition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 2,50,000 (=250,000 x 300,000 won x 300,000 won x 5 months x 5 months) of the rent and the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from January 17, 2018 to September 16, 2018, and the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated at the rate of KRW 300,000 per month from September 17, 2018 to the first day out of the date the Defendant occupies the instant building or the date the Plaintiff loses ownership

Meanwhile, as long as the Defendant, while occupying and using the instant building, refused to perform the obligation to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent accrued continuously and repeatedly as a result thereof, it is anticipated that the Defendant would not perform the obligation to return unjust enrichment, which the due date comes from the date of completion of possession of the instant building or the date of the Plaintiff’s loss of ownership, whichever comes earlier.

Therefore, the Plaintiff needs to claim in advance the portion of unjust enrichment that is due and payable in the future.

A judgment without holding any pleadings (Articles 208(3)1 and 257(1) of the Civil Procedure Act).

arrow