logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.23 2020가단544774
건물인도
Text

1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff one story of 304.38 square meters among the buildings listed in the attached Table list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A building indicated in the attached list (hereinafter the instant building) and its site were owned by C. On May 20, 2015, C leased the instant building, setting the lease deposit deposit amounting to 30 million won on the first floor (general restaurant) 304.38 square meters (hereinafter the instant building) among the instant buildings, to the Defendant as 60 months from June 22, 2015 to June 21, 2020.

(hereinafter referred to as the “Lease”). B.

On May 21, 2020, the Plaintiff purchased the instant building and its site from C with the price of 2.5 billion won, and acquired the ownership of the instant building and its site with the registration of ownership transfer on July 7, 2020.

C. On July 7, 2020, C returned 30 million won to the Defendant of the instant lease deposit.

[Evidence: Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 9; Evidence without dispute; All purport of the argument]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the lease of this case expired on June 21, 2020, and thus, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building portion to the plaintiff who is the owner, unless there are special circumstances.

B. On April 1, 2020, the defendant's assertion 1) that the contract of this case was renewed by agreement between D and E standing director who is the representative of C on April 1, 2020, as "40 million won for rental deposit and monthly rent of 4 million won", and the term of the lease of this case was extended to two years (by June 20, 202). Thus, the contract of this case was renewed.

Since the defendant is a tenant with opposing power under Article 3 (1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the plaintiff succeeded to the status of the lessor, and therefore the plaintiff cannot demand the defendant to deliver the above building portion.

B) In full view of the judgment of the court below, Gap 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, Eul 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and Eul 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (including virtual numbers) (the whole purport of the argument in this case), Eul shall be the lease of this case between the defendant and around five months before the expiration of the lease of this case from February 7, 2020.

arrow