logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.21 2017가단5071129
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The defendant

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

B. From April 2, 2017, the above buildings.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 6, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”) at KRW 15,00,000 per month of rent, setting the period from August 1, 2016 to August 1, 2018; and KRW 1,500,000 per month of rent, with respect to the building indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”).

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Around August 1, 2016, the Plaintiff delivered the instant building to the Defendant.

The defendant has occupied and used the building of this case until now.

B. On July 6, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 10,000,000, which is part of the deposit, to the Plaintiff, and paid KRW 500,000 on October 17, 2016, and KRW 1,550,000 on November 18, 2016.

C. On April 1, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease contract was terminated on the grounds of the delay of rent, and that the Plaintiff claimed KRW 9,950,000 for the unpaid rent by March 31, 2017.

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of India’s recognition, the instant lease agreement was terminated on April 1, 2014, and the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff.

B. The deposit received from the lease of rent and unjust enrichment is a security for all the lessee’s obligations arising from the lease, such as rent and liability for damages arising from the destruction, damage, etc. of an object. The amount equivalent to the secured obligation is naturally deducted from the deposit without any separate declaration of intention, unless there are special circumstances, when the object is returned after the termination of the lease relationship (Supreme Court Decision 2015Da23020 Decided July 27, 2016). As seen earlier, as recognized earlier, the unpaid rent of KRW 10,00,000 (unpaid rent of KRW 9,950,000 until March 31, 2017) was deducted from the amount of KRW 10,000,000,000, which was unpaid by April 1, 2017, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50,000,000,000 refunded to the Plaintiff by April 1, 2017.

(c) Unpaid rents by the former lessee.

arrow