(영문) 청주지방법원제천지원 2019.11.13 2019가단22070

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) 청주지방법원제천지원 2019.11.13 2019가단22070

임대차보증금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 86,016,30 and KRW 1,016,30 among them, from October 12, 2019 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. On June 3, 2015, the Plaintiff, with the indication of the claim, leased Jeju Apartment and D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from the Defendant as “85,00,000 won for lease deposit, and from July 15, 2015 to July 15, 2017,” and the said lease deposit was paid to the Defendant around that time.

After the above lease contract was implicitly renewed and terminated on April 10, 2019, the Plaintiff paid 1,016,330 won for long-term repair appropriations on behalf of the Defendant during the lease term.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount of KRW 85,00,000, and the long-term repair appropriations of KRW 1,016,30,00 and delay damages of KRW 86,016,330.

2. Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts;

3. Part of each term of termination claim for damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment. However, there is no assertion as to the fact that the plaintiff's obligation to deliver the apartment of this case with the obligation to return the lease deposit was fulfilled or provided with performance.

Therefore, the above damages for delay is without merit.

The Plaintiff claimed damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of full payment. However, if there is no deadline for performing the obligation, the obligor is liable for delay from the time of receipt of a request for performance (see Article 387(2) of the Civil Act). The Defendant shall be liable for delay from the day after receiving a request for modification of the purport of the claim of this case by serving the application for modification of the long-term repair appropriations as of October 4, 201

Therefore, there is no reason for exceeding the above recognition scope among the above claims for delay damages.

참조조문

-민법 제387조 제2항

-민사소송법 제208조 제3항 제1호

-민사소송법 제257조

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2020.06.26 2020가단106870

-대구지방법원 김천지원 2018.05.15 2017가단35454

-부산지방법원 2019.11.14 2019가단13199

-청주지방법원제천지원 2019.12.11 2018가단22622

-대구지방법원경주지원 2019.10.02 2019가단1773