logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.10.11 2016가단22955
임대차보증금반환
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 85,00,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from June 3, 2016 to June 13, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 10, 2014, the Plaintiff leased an apartment of Gwangju Northern-gu C and the third floor (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with a lease deposit of KRW 85,00,000,00 from May 16, 2014 to May 18, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and on May 19, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 85,000,000 to the Defendant under the instant lease agreement.

B. The Plaintiff notified the Defendant that there was no intention to renew the instant lease contract before the expiration of the lease term and requested the return of the lease deposit, but failed to receive the lease deposit from the Defendant.

C. Accordingly, on May 31, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the order of lease registration with the Gwangju District Court 2016Kao87, and delivered the instant apartment to the Defendant around June 2, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the instant lease agreement was terminated upon the expiration of the period, and since the Plaintiff transferred the instant apartment to the Defendant on or around June 2, 2016, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff delay damages calculated at the rate of 85,00,000 won per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from June 3, 2016 to June 13, 2016, which is obvious from the day following the day when the Plaintiff delivered the instant apartment, to the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was delivered to the Defendant, and at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of complete payment.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow