(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.08.23 2018가단211962

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) 서울서부지방법원 2019.08.23 2018가단211962

차임지급

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Around June 1, 2016, the Plaintiff Company (the representative C and D at the time) concluded a lease agreement to sub-let the Defendant Company with a deposit deposit of KRW 27,744,302, rent of KRW 3,861,082 (including management expenses, value added tax), and the term of lease from June 1, 2016 to May 31, 2019.

At that time, the defendant company moved in the office of this case, but did not pay deposit and rent.

B. Around the early 2017, the Plaintiff Company was dismissed from office as representative director on May 2017, 2017.

C. The management demanded the payment of rent by the Plaintiff Company, and the Defendant removed from the office of this case on June 6, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. On the grounds that a lease contract as stated in the above lease contract was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant, the plaintiff asserted that the rent in arrears was paid to the defendant in arrears. The defendant claimed that the above lease contract was formally and actually concluded free of charge. 2) In this case, the above lease contract was signed by the defendant, and the name and contact details of the representative director are only attached to the contract of this case (A 3), and the name and contact details of the representative director are not stated, the contract date is not entered, and the deposit and the rent are also written in the original unit, and there is no deposit or rent claim by the plaintiff. In full view of the overall purport of the statement as stated in subparagraphs 1 through 14 and the testimony of the witness of the witness of this case, the above lease contract is merely prepared formally, and each statement as stated in subparagraphs 8 through 15 of this Article, witness F, and testimony of G alone, as alleged by the plaintiff.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2015.04.29 2014가단35734

-서울남부지방법원 2015.01.29 2014가단35741

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.08.21 2014가단65567

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2021.04.13 2020가단33007

-대구지방법원 2018.02.08 2017고정1308