logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.04.22 2015나24449
건물인도
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition, modification, or correction as follows. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be added, modified or corrected;

A. Grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance

B. 1) The Defendant asserts to the effect that, as the lessee B has the right to request renewal of the lease agreement for a period of five years under the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, it cannot be deemed that the lease period has expired since it was demanded renewal prior to the expiration of the lease contract.

However, according to Article 2 of the former Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (amended by Act No. 12042, Aug. 13, 2013) and Article 2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25036, Dec. 30, 2013), the right to request the renewal of a contract under the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act does not apply to the lease exceeding KRW 300 million in cases of Seoul Special Metropolitan City (including the amount converted by multiplying the monthly rent by 1/100). Thus, in cases of the lease between the Plaintiff and B, the provision on the contract renewal of the right to request the renewal of the contract under the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act does not apply, as acknowledged earlier.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. Grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance

B. 4) The defendant is changed as follows. 4) Even if the plaintiff did not refund the deposit to B, and even if the lease term expires pursuant to Article 4(2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act, the lease relationship between the plaintiff and B shall be deemed to continue until the lessee is returned.

arrow