(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.30 2018가단554228

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 2019.05.30 2018가단554228

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. From December 27, 2018, the above real estate.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On May 16, 2017, the Plaintiff leased the instant building to C with a lease deposit of KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 1050,000.

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking the delivery of the instant building on the ground of the termination of the lease agreement on the ground of the delinquency in rent (U.S. District Court 2018Da532051), and was rendered a favorable judgment on September 20, 2018.

However, the present building of this case is currently residing by C, who is the subject.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to deliver the above building to the plaintiff, who is the owner of the building of this case, unless there are special circumstances. 2) The defendant also has a duty to return the building as unjust enrichment, since the defendant gains profit equivalent to the use of the building of this case and thereby causes damages equivalent to the same amount to the plaintiff, who is the owner of the building of this case. The amount of unjust enrichment is KRW 1050,000 per month, which is the amount equivalent to the rent of the building of this case.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of KRW 1,50,000 per month from December 27, 2018 to the delivery date of the building, following the delivery date of a copy of the instant complaint, as requested by the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant cannot deliver the building of this case before the refund of the remaining lease deposit after deducting the overdue rent from the lease deposit paid by C to the plaintiff. However, as seen earlier, since the defendant occupies the building of this case without any possession title, the defendant's above argument cannot be accepted.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable and acceptable.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2019.01.30 2018가단537100

-대전지방법원 2019.05.15 2018가단21866

-대전지방법원천안지원 2016.10.13 2016가단105301

-대구지방법원 상주지원 2018.01.24 2017가단130

-창원지방법원 2015.11.11 2015나31685