(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.07.01 2015가단115466

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) 의정부지방법원 2016.07.01 2015가단115466

임대차보증금반환

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 12,169,630 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from July 5, 2015 to July 1, 2016, and the following.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 21, 2012, the Plaintiff, from the Defendant, leased from the Defendant, the land B, C, and its ground buildings owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at the time from February 18, 2013 to February 17, 2015, the lease deposit amount of KRW 250 million, monthly rent of KRW 500,000 (hereinafter “instant lease”). At that time, the Plaintiff paid the said lease deposit to the Defendant.

B. On December 24, 2014, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement, and on February 6, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to refund the said lease deposit to the Plaintiff by the end of June, 2015, even if the new lessee was not a contract on the instant real estate, but the said lease deposit was not concluded by the new lessee. However, the Plaintiff agreed to restore the instant real estate to its original state and return the said lease deposit.

C. Around June 25, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 10 million to the Defendant for the cost of restoration to the original state, and the Plaintiff deposited KRW 2 million to the Defendant for the settlement of defects and public charges that may arise later, and the Defendant returned it upon the completion of the subsequent settlement.

D. On July 4, 2015, the Plaintiff delivered the instant real estate to the Defendant. On the same day, the Defendant returned only KRW 22,755,000,000, which deducted KRW 22,4550,00 from the above lease deposit, to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the lease contract of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the period, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to return the unpaid lease deposit to the plaintiff 2,450,000 won.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mutual aid

A. The summary of the defendant's assertion (1) The plaintiff did not perform his duty to restore the real estate of this case to its original state in accordance with the instant lease agreement.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원군산지원 2016.09.20 2016가단2647

-창원지방법원 2019.05.16 2018가단106923

-수원지방법원 2020.11.17 2019나75136

-부산지방법원 2016.11.25 2015나41067

-광주지방법원순천지원 2015.06.17 2015가단72013