(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.05.22 2013가합15770

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.05.22 2013가합15770

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 30, 200, the Plaintiffs, from the Defendant, set the lease deposit amounting to KRW 500 million, monthly rent of KRW 600,000,000, and the lease period from January 1, 200 to December 31, 2001 (hereinafter “the lease contract in this case”) the term “the lease contract in this case”) and operated the sales store of Seodaemun-gu and Ligu in the instant lease object.

B. The instant lease agreement was renewed annually, and the Defendant sent to the Plaintiffs on November 17, 201, proof that the contract was terminated on the grounds of the expiration of the lease term on December 31, 2011.

On December 31, 2011, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant decided to extend the instant lease agreement from January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013. On March 23, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the extension of the lease agreement as above with this court No. 2012No. 51.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant lawsuit telephone”). C.

On May 24, 2013, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate to the effect that the contract is terminated on the grounds of the termination of the instant lease agreement, and that no later than June 30, 2013, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to order the subject matter of the instant lease. The Plaintiffs delivered the subject matter of the instant lease to the Defendant prior to the termination of the instant lease agreement.

As a new lessee of the leased object of this case, the Plaintiffs requested the Plaintiffs to pay KRW 65 million in total, and KRW 65 million from E, when the Plaintiffs demanded to pay KRW 50 million on July 2, 2013, and KRW 65 million on July 15, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The plaintiffs' assertion that around November 201, 201 the building of this case against the plaintiffs.

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2015.11.19 2014나3856

-서울북부지방법원 2016.04.22 2015가단142489

-수원지방법원평택지원 2020.08.21 2020가단55655

-대구지방법원 2017.01.13 2016가단22070

-수원지방법원성남지원 2019.02.20 2018가단208269