(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.10.02 2017가단227133

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) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.10.02 2017가단227133

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant shall receive KRW 239,675,00 from the plaintiff, and at the same time real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including paper numbers) and Eul evidence 1:

B around November 23, 2010, around November 23, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) on the real estate listed in the separate sheet, which is a public construction rental house owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. B, around April 2015, upon receiving premium of KRW 80,000,000 to the Defendant, agreed to transfer the right to lease of the instant apartment (hereinafter “the right to lease of this case”) to the Defendant, and upon making an agreement to transfer the right to lease of the instant apartment (hereinafter “the right to lease of this case”), B made an application to the Plaintiff for the consent to transfer the right to lease of the rental housing

C. On June 11, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a contract with B and the Defendant to succeed to the rights and obligations of the instant lease agreement (hereinafter “instant succession contract”). D.

On January 20, 2017, the Plaintiff renewed the instant lease agreement with the Defendant at KRW 239,675,00, monthly rent of KRW 693,910.

E. Around May 2017, B received a summary order of KRW 5,00,000, and became final and conclusive as it is, on the following grounds: “In addition, B transferred the right of lease to the Defendant, even if there was no justifiable reason to transfer the right of lease because it was not in the case of moving the residence for reasons such as work after moving into the rental house, etc., and there was no justifiable reason to transfer the right of lease.”

F. On July 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that “the instant succession contract is cancelled and the instant lease contract is terminated” on the grounds of the illegal transfer of the right of lease under B.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of this case constitutes a contract acceptance and the Defendant’s rights and duties.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.21 2016고단8029

-수원지방법원 2017.08.31 2017고정1720

-수원지방법원 2017.11.15 2017고정1817

-수원지방법원 2017.09.13 2017고정1695

-서울동부지방법원 2017.09.13 2015가단131131