logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.01.29 2015나183
건물명도
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the money that orders payment under paragraph 2 below with respect to the claim for payment of the principal lawsuit.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 26, 2013, the Plaintiff leased, among Defendant B, one of the neighborhood living facilities listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant neighborhood living facilities”) owned by the Plaintiff as KRW 20,000,000 (including value-added tax) from November 6, 2013 to November 6, 2015, respectively, during the lease period: Provided, That the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement including a special agreement that the Defendant B’s obligation to pay rent arises from January 1, 2014.

B. On August 26, 2013, the Plaintiff leased each of the houses listed in the attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant house”) owned by the Plaintiff with Defendant C as KRW 10,000 (including value-added tax) from November 6, 2013 to November 6, 2015, and KRW 660,000 (including value-added tax), respectively, during the lease period from November 6, 2013 to November 6, 2015. However, the obligation to pay the rent of Defendant C entered into a lease agreement including a special agreement that arises from January 1, 2014.

C. During the period from August 26, 2013 to November 27, 2013, Defendant B paid KRW 13,333,34 out of the lease deposit for the instant neighborhood living facilities, and Defendant C paid KRW 6,66,666 out of the lease deposit for the instant housing for the same period, but the remainder of the lease deposit was not paid.

On the other hand, around November 8, 2013, the Plaintiff delivered the instant neighborhood living facilities to Defendant B and the instant housing to Defendant C, and the Defendants occupied and used the instant neighborhood living facilities and housing from that time, but did not pay the Plaintiff rent from January 1, 2014.

E. On March 3, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) on the ground that the Defendants failed to pay two or more rents; and

(a)paragraphs 1 and 2;

The notice of termination of each of the above lease agreements (hereinafter referred to as the “instant lease agreement”) was sent to the Defendants on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 9, and Eul No. 1 and 1.

arrow