logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.10.26 2018가단105499
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) shall deliver to the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2...

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

The first contract (the date of the conclusion) 50 million won under the first contract (the date of the first contract) - February 29, 2012 - February 28, 2016, which is KRW 12 million until February 28, 2014, - the next 13 million - the second first contract (the date of the second change - March 21- 2013. 20, 2013. 203. 20 March 20, 2016. 13 million won until February 20, 2014; 14 million won thereafter - 32 billion won after the said contract (the date of the second change - 60 billion - 14 million 600,0000 won); and 315,000,0000 won after the date of the second change - 15,2016. 8. 15.2015.

-the expiration date of the extension of the contract without a separate notice;

B. The defendant has been doing business in the commercial building of this case until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 2 (including a provisional number) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above recognition, the instant lease was terminated on March 19, 2018 after the expiration of the period.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver the commercial building of this case to the plaintiff as a lessor, barring special circumstances.

B. Defendant’s assertion and judgment 1) The summary of the argument (the grounds for counterclaim) is that the Defendant demanded the extension of the contract period or the conclusion of a lease agreement with the new lessee before the termination of the lease agreement of this case, but the Plaintiff refused it, thereby obstructing the Defendant from receiving the premium from the new lessee. Therefore, the Plaintiff was amended by Act No. 14242, May 29, 2016.

c. Article 2(1) of the Family Lease Act

Pursuant to Article 10-4, the defendant shall have considerable loss on the premium for the commercial building of this case and this.

arrow