(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.01.25 2017가단17296

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 2018.01.25 2017가단17296

건물명도등

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 6, 1.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 25, 2015, the Plaintiff, on the attached list, leased to the Defendant KRW 20,000, KRW 20,000,00 on the ship (hereinafter “instant real property”) part (a) of 20,000 square meters, which was successively connected each point of 1, 2, 3, 36, 66, and 1, among the real estate listed in the attached list, among the real estate listed in the attached list, by setting the lease term as KRW 24 months, lease deposit money as KRW 3

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Defendant unpaid KRW 3,200,000 for monthly rent (16 months until the end of May 2017) prescribed in the instant lease agreement and KRW 1,339,010 for management expenses from October 2015 to April 2017.

C. The Plaintiff, on the ground that the Defendant was in arrears with two or more occasions, declared that the instant lease contract was terminated by the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint, and the duplicate of the complaint was served on the Defendant on June 29, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, since the lease contract of this case was terminated, the defendant delivered the real estate of this case to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff, 1,539,100 won, which is the amount claimed by the plaintiff, out of the rent and management fee in arrears, deducted the lease deposit amount of KRW 3,00,000 to be refunded to the defendant from the rent and management fee in arrears.

In addition, from June 1, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the above real estate, there is a duty to pay rent and unjust enrichment in proportion to KRW 200,000 per month.

3. The Defendant’s argument regarding the instant real estate concluded the instant lease agreement by promising the Plaintiff to repair the entrance door and the ceiling of the instant real estate. However, the Plaintiff was able to repair the instant real estate at the end of January 2016, and the Plaintiff was not able to use and profit from the instant real estate because the Plaintiff was not able to repair the instant real estate even if the water emitted from the floor of the instant real estate, and the Defendant was able to use and benefit from the instant real estate since November 2016.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.10.18 2018가단229266

-서울서부지방법원 2019.04.04 2018가단17771

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.29 2015가단5051466

-광주지방법원 2021.04.13 2020가단529026

-광주지방법원 2017.10.24 2017가단8888