(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.10.06 2015가단21725

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) 서울남부지방법원 2015.10.06 2015가단21725

건물인도 등

Text

1. The Defendant shall attach 55,00,000 won and 990,000 won from the Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the appointed parties and from October 19, 2014.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 12, 2014, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties leased the two-story 160.98 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) among the real estate listed in the attached list jointly owned by the Defendant, as the lease period from June 20, 2014 to June 19, 2016, the lease deposit amount of KRW 55,000,000, and the monthly rent of KRW 2,700,000 (excluding value-added tax).

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

Around that time, the Defendant paid KRW 55,000,000 to the Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the appointed parties, and used the instant real estate until the day of closing the argument of the instant case. The Defendant did not pay to the Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the appointed parties, who were the lessor, the rent of KRW 90,000 among the first monthly rent and the monthly rent from October 19, 2014.

C. On March 3, 2015, the Selection C sent to the Defendant an intention to terminate the contract by way of content-certified mail on the grounds of more than two years of delay of rent.

【Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap's evidence 1 through 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the expression of intent to terminate the instant lease on the ground of the Defendant’s two or more occasions of delay was sent by content-certified mail on March 3, 2015, and there is no evidence that the said mail was returned. Therefore, it is presumed that the expression of intent to terminate the said lease has reached the Defendant at that time (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da20052, Oct. 27, 2000). Accordingly, even if it is determined that the instant lease was lawfully terminated, even if the said content-certified mail was not delivered to the Defendant, the expression of intent to terminate the said lease was delivered to the Defendant at the time of delivery of the copy of the complaint, and at the latest, it appears that the instant lease was terminated at the latest.

Unless there are special circumstances, the defendant is from the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party at KRW 55,00,000, as the plaintiff (appointed party) seeks.

참조판례

-대법원 2000. 10. 27. 선고 2000다20052 판결

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2016.01.12 2015가단218741

-서울남부지방법원 2016.01.26 2015가단47857

-춘천지방법원 2020.10.13 2020가단50818

-서울동부지방법원 2017.08.30 2017가단116488

-인천지방법원 2017.12.21 2017가단30711