(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.11.11 2015가단237737

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 2016.11.11 2015가단237737

채무불이행

Text

1. The Defendant: KRW 23,640,589 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from June 10, 2015 to December 20, 2015 for the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Factual basis

A. B is the owner of the building of the 1st and 5th above ground in Busan Dong-gu (hereinafter “instant building”), and D manages the instant building upon the punishment of B.

E entered into a lease agreement between B and D on March 11, 2014, setting the lease term of 24 months from April 10, 2014, lease deposit of 80,000,000 won with respect to the whole three floors of the above building, and operated a marriage information company "F" at that place.

B. G, which had been undergoing marriage procedures with Vietnamese women due to E’s brokerage, was delayed entry into the Republic of Korea of the other women, and as a result, a fire was caused by dusting a stopner on the floor of the building and the body of E and attaching a fire by putting it off on the body of the building and the body of E, around 10:55 on March 27, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant fire”). Accordingly, the ceiling, walls, floors, windows, etc. of the third floor of the instant building were destroyed, and E (hereinafter “the deceased”) died.

As bereaved family members of the deceased, the wife and the son were the Defendant, and the wife of the deceased renounced the inheritance to the deceased.

Expenses incurred in repairing the destroyed part, etc. of the building of this case due to the fire of this case are KRW 40,673,949.

C. As to the instant building and B, the Plaintiff concluded an insurance contract with the insurance coverage amount of KRW 150,000,000 (insurance value of KRW 360,664,165) from January 8, 2015 to January 8, 2016, and paid KRW 23,640,589 to B’s agent D on June 9, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1 to Eul evidence 5, Eul evidence 1 to Eul evidence 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. (1) There is no dispute between the parties as to whether the third floor part of the instant building, which is the leased object, was destroyed by the fire of the lessee’s damage liability, and the lessee’s return of the leased object became impossible.

A lessee shall fulfill his duty of due care as a good manager with respect to the preservation of a leased building.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.26 2015가단5234513

-서울서부지방법원 2018.07.06 2016가단241655

-대법원 2001. 1. 19. 선고 2000다57351 판결

-대법원 2006. 1. 13. 선고 2005다51013, 51020 판결

-대구지방법원서부지원 2017.05.10 2016가단50041