logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.10 2014가합569030
건물명도
Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim claim against B are all dismissed.

2...

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 22, 2011, Defendant C leased the instant building from the Plaintiff during the lease deposit period of KRW 30,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 3,000 (excluding value-added tax) and from November 1, 2011 to October 31, 2013, to operate a factory in the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”).

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). At the time of the conclusion of the said lease agreement, the Plaintiff and Defendant C agreed to the effect that “if necessary for factory registration, the Plaintiff cooperates with all documents.”

B. Defendant C established Defendant B on October 7, 201 to operate a cosmetic-making factory in the instant building, and completed business registration on October 28, 201.

C. Meanwhile, on August 2, 2010, the Plaintiff completed registration of factory under Article 16 of the Industrial Cluster Development and Factory Establishment Act on the instant building with the trade name D prior to the conclusion of the instant lease agreement.

In order for Defendant C to register a factory on the instant building, the Plaintiff’s registration of the factory was revoked, or the name of the factory was transferred from the Plaintiff. However, the Plaintiff did not cooperate with Defendant C during the instant lease period.

On December 11, 2013, the chemical Mayor revoked the registration ex officio on the ground that the plaintiff's registration of the above factory was destroyed by manufacturing facilities.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 27 and 51, the fact-finding results of this court's fact-finding, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant C did not pay the rent of KRW 33,500,000 until April 2013, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement on the ground that Defendant C did not pay the rent of KRW 33,500,000 for more than two years.

Therefore, Defendant C delivers the instant building to the Plaintiff, and under the said lease agreement from May 1, 2013 to the completion date of the delivery.

arrow