logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.08.18 2016가합107224
업무방해금지청구의 소
Text

1. The defendant points out 1, 2, 3, 4 and 1 among the three floors of the building listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Defendant is a building listed in the separate sheet from Category D (hereinafter “instant building”) around February 2015.

Of the three floors, a postnatal care center was established and operated jointly with several persons, such as E, etc. on May 28, 2015 with the lessor’s consent, and on May 28, 2015, part 16.53 square meters inboard connecting each point of 1, 2, 3, 44, and 16.53 square meters in sequence among the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the sub-lease of this case”).

(2) The sub-lease contract of this case (hereinafter referred to as the “sub-lease contract of this case”) shall be made between June 1, 2015 and May 31, 2016 during the period of sub-lease 3 million won (hereinafter referred to as the “sub-lease contract of this case”).

(2) From that time, the Plaintiff established and operated a marina shop (hereinafter “instant business”) for the mother in the name of “C” in the instant sub-lease, and around June 2016, the Defendant arbitrarily removed the Plaintiff’s goods for the instant business from the instant sub-lease, and directly operated the instant business while occupying the instant sub-lease.

3) The Defendant did not notify the Plaintiff of the refusal to renew or modify the instant sub-lease contract between six months and one month before the expiration of the said sub-lease period. [The grounds for recognition] The Defendant did not dispute, Gap 1 through 6, and Eul 3, respectively, or video (including those with the serial number).

hereinafter the same shall apply.

- The purport of the whole pleadings

B. 1) According to the above facts of recognition, the instant sub-lease contract was explicitly renewed after the expiration of the period pursuant to Articles 10(4) and 13 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, and its duration was extended one year until May 31, 2017. Unless there is any assertion as to the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the refusal or change of the terms and conditions between six months and one month before the expiration of the extended period, the renewal was renewed again, and its duration was extended one year until May 31, 2018.

arrow