(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2017.05.26 2016가단54704

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) 수원지방법원안산지원 2017.05.26 2016가단54704

상가권리금 청구의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 11, 2008, the Plaintiff leased the said building to KRW 30,000,000 from the previous owner of the member-gu Seoul Na-dong 101 (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) in Ansan-si (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and operated the real estate brokerage business under the trade name “D Licensed Real Estate Agent Office.”

B. Around February 27, 2012, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant building under the name of the Defendant, and succeeded to a lease agreement concluded with the Plaintiff regarding the instant building from the previous owner. On February 27, 2012, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with the Plaintiff by setting the lease period by February 26, 2014.

C. On October 31, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the instant building was terminated, and demanded the Plaintiff to deliver the building by October 31, 2015. On September 7, 2015, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to deliver the instant building on February 26, 2016, along with an expression of intent to refuse the renewal of the contract. On October 21, 2015, the Plaintiff responded that the instant building will be delivered to the Defendant by December 20, 2015, and the Defendant, on December 20, 2015, operated the real estate brokerage business with the trade name “E-real estate.”

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1, Gap evidence 12, the video and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant infringed the plaintiff's right to request renewal of the lease agreement, and that the contract with the plaintiff was terminated for his own business and the plaintiff deprived the plaintiff of the opportunity to recover the plaintiff's premium upon delivery of the building in this case, the defendant is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to the premium to the plaintiff. In fact, the defendant expressed his intention to pay the premium

As to this, the defendant shall include the first term of lease.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2017.04.21 2016가합100983

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.03 2018가단5091397

-대구지방법원 2016.11.30 2015가단49931

-부산지방법원 2018.10.19 2018가단302182

-광주지방법원 2016.06.14 2015가단52522