(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.04.25 2016가단257755

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) 인천지방법원 2018.04.25 2016가단257755

임대차보증금

Text

1. On November 24, 2017, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 90,000,000 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its related amount.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded the instant lease agreement with the Defendant, setting a deposit of KRW 120,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 5,000,000, and the period from August 1, 2014 to July 31, 2016 (2).

B. Article 9 (Compensation for Damages) of the instant lease agreement states the following:

Article 9 (Compensation for Damages) The Plaintiff shall terminate this Agreement in the event of an accident (including the suspension of business and the imposition of fines, etc.) caused by the business of selling fake oil and other oil during the operation of the gas station, and the liability arising therefrom shall be the Plaintiff, the deposit for lease shall be attributed to the Defendant, and the deposit for lease shall be paid separately to the Defendant.

C. On August 1, 2014, the Plaintiff started operating the instant gas station with the trade name “Friju station.”

On October 31, 2014, the Plaintiff sold fake petroleum and discovered the results of the quality inspection of the Institute.

E. Upon the request of the Plaintiff to pay part of the lease deposit, the Defendant returned KRW 80,000,000 to the Plaintiff on November 10, 2014 and KRW 30,000,000 on November 14, 2014.

F. On November 24, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred the instant gas station to another person, and operated the gas station business in the name of “H gas station” on the Seo-gu G and the first floor of Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon.

G. On the other hand, on January 7, 2015, the Plaintiff was subject to an administrative disposition of suspension of business for three months (from January 12, 2015 to April 11, 2015) on the grounds of violation of Article 29 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (Prohibition of Manufacture, etc. of Fake Petroleum Products) (former October 31, 2014).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 7 through 9 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence No. 1, the fact inquiry result of Kimpo-il, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the plaintiff's main claim.

참조조문

-석유 및 석유대체연료 사업법 제29조

유사 판례

-대구지방법원상주지원 2019.05.09 2018가합5313

-인천지방법원 2018.07.05 2016구합53566

-서울고등법원 2016.11.02 2016나7564

-인천지방법원 2016.04.29 2015가합1655

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.04.01 2015가단75516