(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.12.23 2015가합34

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) 울산지방법원 2015.12.23 2015가합34

토지인도 등

Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant (Appointed Party) received KRW 10,000,000 from the Plaintiff at the same time, and attached Form 1.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Lease contract and new construction of a building; 1) Defendant (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Defendant”) is only the Defendant.

On May 6, 2008, the Plaintiff’s land Nos. 1 through 4 (hereinafter “each of the instant land”) owned by the Plaintiff from the Plaintiff.

At the time of the lease contract, the area was part of the area D 2245 square meters in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, and the area was divided into 201 square meters in accordance with the purpose of the lease contract and became each of the instant land.

1) The term “the instant lease” refers to each of the following: (a) the deposit of KRW 10,000,000; (b) the monthly rent of KRW 1.2 million; and (c) the lease of KRW 72 months from the date of completion of the building;

In addition, the newly constructed building is registered in the name of the Plaintiff on the public register, and the Defendant has the right to the building, but the land was returned by restoring it to its original state, such as removing the ground building within one month after the expiration of the lease term (hereinafter “instant restitution agreement”).

(2) The Defendant newly constructed a building No. 5 of [Attachment 1] on each land of this case No. 1 and No. 2 of annexed Table 1 (hereinafter “instant building”) and obtained approval for use on October 23, 2008.

3) The Appointor C (hereinafter “Appointed”) is only the Appointor C.

(B) On May 9, 2014, and May 23, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that each of the instant land should be delivered and the instant building should be removed, as the Plaintiff did not want to renew the instant lease contract, and each of the above notification reached the Defendant around that time. [The grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 10, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) or video No. 1 to the instant building.

result of this Court’s verification, the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The above basic facts are examined as to the termination of the instant lease agreement, barring special circumstances.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원상주지원 2016.04.06 2015가단2194

-대구지방법원 김천지원 2018.09.06 2017가단3402

-서울서부지방법원 2019.04.05 2017가단24932

-제주지방법원 2019.02.15 2018나11503

-대전고등법원 2015.12.09 2015나1947