logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.01.11 2017가합57337
보증금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 3, 2015, the lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) the Plaintiff: (b) leased the leased commercial buildings indicated in the attached Table to the Plaintiff as KRW 50,000,000; (c) the monthly rent of KRW 957,000; and (d) the period from June 3, 2015 to June 2, 2020 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”); (c) the Plaintiff paid KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant under the instant lease contract; and (d) the Defendant handed over the commercial buildings indicated in the attached Table to the Plaintiff.

On September 14, 2015, the Plaintiff registered its business.

B. As of November 2017, the Plaintiff, who expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement, failed to pay more than three rents as of November 2017, and the legal brief dated December 6, 2017, containing the Defendant’s declaration of intent to terminate the said lease agreement on the grounds of the delinquency in rent, reached the Plaintiff on December 7, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-6, 2-4, Eul evidence 3-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the Defendant expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the ground of the rent delay for at least three (3) months on December 6, 2017, and the instant lease agreement was terminated upon arrival of such declaration to the Plaintiff on December 7, 2017, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount calculated by deducting the unpaid rent from the lease deposit.

B. The defendant's defense and its determination 1) The defendant asserts that C acquired the ownership of the commercial building indicated in the separate sheet and acquired the lessor's status as a lessor. Thus, the defendant's obligation to return the lease deposit was extinguished. 2) Article 3 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Commercial Building Lease Protection Act") provides that "a opposing power, etc." and Article 3(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (other than opposing power, etc.) (1) even in the absence of the registration, the tenant is delivered

arrow