(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.04.28 2019가단524682

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) 수원지방법원 2020.04.28 2019가단524682

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The Defendant from the Plaintiff KRW 1,614,00 to December 16, 2019 (attached Form 1) of the building listed in the list (attached Form 2).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 5, 2015, the deceased (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the part (hereinafter “instant store”) of 153 square meters (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) connected in sequence to the Defendant, in the first floor of the building listed in the list (attached Form 1) owned by the deceased, (attached Form 1) (attached Form 2), 2, 3, 4, and 1, the drawings indicating 153 square meters (hereinafter “instant store”) of the leased deposit, KRW 30 million, KRW 4 million per month of rent (excluding value-added tax, and KRW 16,00,000 per month) and the lease term from November 16, 2015 to November 15, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. Under the instant lease agreement, the Defendant paid KRW 30 million to the Deceased, and has taken over the instant store from the Deceased and has occupied and used it up to the present day.

C. The instant lease agreement was explicitly renewed after the aforementioned lease term, and the deceased and the Defendant agreed to increase the monthly rent from April 2018 to KRW 4.620,00 (including value-added tax) under the instant lease agreement.

After filing the instant lawsuit, the Deceased died on May 16, 2019.

The Plaintiff, a child of the deceased, inherited the rights and duties concerning the instant store and the instant lease contract by division of inherited property, and took over the instant legal proceedings.

E. On July 9, 2019, a copy of the instant complaint containing the purport that the Deceased or the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent for the three-year period of time was served on the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3-2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Defendant did not delay the Plaintiff’s three vehicles, and the Deceased or the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease by serving a duplicate of the complaint on the deceased or the Plaintiff on the ground of this. Even if the Defendant did not delay the three vehicles, the instant lease was terminated.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2017.12.22 2017가합2010

-의정부지방법원 2015.07.07 2014가단40008

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2020.10.28 2020가단74265

-창원지방법원통영지원 2019.01.22 2018가단1789

-대전지방법원 2018.05.02 2017가단24233