(영문) 제주지방법원 2018.04.27 2017가단9151

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) 제주지방법원 2018.04.27 2017가단9151

건물인도

Text

1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff one story of 104.52 square meters among the buildings listed in the attached list.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant has renewed the contract every year since he leased on January 25, 2008 the 104.52 square meters of 1 floor (55.32 square meters of general restaurants on the building ledger, 49.2 square meters of retail stores, hereinafter “instant store”) among the buildings listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. As of January 30, 2016, a contract was drafted between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to renew the contract by January 29, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and the annual rent of 2017 is KRW 12 million.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Eul's statement of No. 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the lease contract for the store of this case is terminated upon the expiration of the above period, the defendant is obligated to deliver the store of this case to the plaintiff.

B. On August 25, 2017, the defendant argued that the plaintiff would rent the store of this case, including the second floor of the building of this case where he resides in, without a rent increase of 25 million won per annum. The defendant accepted it and completed the preparation for renewal, such as entering into an agreement to renew the lease contract in advance and partially replacing the house and equipment. On September 14, 2017, the plaintiff unilaterally sold the building of this case and demanded the delivery of the store of this case after the expiration of the contract term is contrary to the good faith and intention. Since the defendant clearly expresses his intention to renew the contract, it is not possible to respond to the plaintiff's request. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that there is a conclusive agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to renew the lease of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise, and more than 5 years prior to the initial lease contract, the defendant is demanded to renew the lease contract of this case.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2015.08.21 2015가단105236

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.21 2018나32035

-부산지방법원 2016.11.24 2016가단302003

-창원지방법원 2019.01.16 2018가단107315

-부산지방법원동부지원 2017.09.12 2016가단209254