logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.01.16 2018가단4488
비닐하우스인도 등
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. From December 1, 2018 to C, the Plaintiff’s vinyls indicated in the separate sheet from KRW 650,00 to KRW 650.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who owns a vinyl house (hereinafter “the vinyl house of this case”) listed in the attached Table on the return of the E (hereinafter “instant land”) in the Asia-si E (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On April 20, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with C, setting the instant vinyl as the deposit amount of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 300,000, and the period of April 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking the delivery of the instant vinyl as the Daejeon District Court’s Branch Branch of the Daejeon District Court (2016Kadan987). On July 14, 2016, the instant lawsuit was concluded on the following (hereinafter “instant conciliation”).

1. The instant lease agreement is confirmed to continue until December 31, 2017, and the monthly rent shall be KRW 150,000.

However, the monthly rent shall be KRW 300,000,000 from the time when the plaintiff acquired the right to the above land.

2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the unpaid rent of KRW 1.5 million up to June 2016 in five equal annual installments from August 1, 2016 to December 1, 2016.

3. On December 31, 2017, the Defendant received the amount obtained by deducting the unpaid rent, etc. from the Plaintiff’s deposit amount of KRW 5 million, from the Plaintiff, and at the same time returned to the original state and handed over the instant vinyl.

The Plaintiff, “from June 1, 2016 to March 21, 2018, the sum of rent of KRW 3.25 million” was unpaid, and on March 23, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 1.75 million after deducting KRW 3.25 million from deposit money in the future C on March 23, 2018.

After that, on April 3, 2018, through enforcement officers, the execution of delivery of real estate under the instant protocol was carried out, but the Defendant, as the wife C, was unable to execute delivery on the ground that he occupied the instant vinyl house.

E. The Plaintiff acquired the right to the instant land even after the instant conciliation.

arrow