logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.04.26 2018가단17867
건물명도 등
Text

1. The Defendants are to the Plaintiff.

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. Jointly, KRW 33,720,00 and April 1, 2019

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 1, 2004, the Plaintiff leased the instant building owned by the Plaintiff to Defendant D, and thereafter, the lessee of the said contract was changed to Defendant C, and some of the contractual terms were changed.

On April 1, 2016, the Plaintiff and Defendant C entered into a lease agreement with the term of KRW 50 million for lease deposit, KRW 6 million for monthly rent (excluding the last day of each month and value-added tax), and the term of lease from April 1, 2016 to March 31, 2017.

(hereinafter “Lease of this case”). (b)

Although the above lease contract was implicitly renewed, the Defendants were in arrears at the end of May 2018, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendants a certificate of the purport that the lease contract is terminated without paying 3,4120,000 won in arrears until May 31, 2018.

C. Defendant D is running an entertainment tavern business in the instant building.

The Defendants repaid each of the costs of KRW 8 million on July 19, 2018, and KRW 58.4 million during the course of the instant lawsuit.

Accordingly, the monthly rent that the Defendant failed to pay up to March 2019 is 3,3720,000 won.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-16, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was three months or more, and the above lease was terminated due to the delay in payment of the rent of the instant lease.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff and pay the unpaid rent of KRW 26120,000 and KRW 6600,000 per month from July 1, 2018 to the completion date of delivery of the said building.

B. In full view of the purport of the entire argument in the facts of recognition under Paragraph (1) above, it is reasonable to view that the above lease was terminated by the service of the plaintiff's notice of termination to the defendants.

Therefore, the Defendants deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, and jointly do so, and the Defendants jointly do not pay the unpaid rent up to March 2019, as well as unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent.

arrow