logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.09.23 2014가단94926
건물명도 등
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 1,677,419.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. One of the costs of lawsuit;

Reasons

1. Case summary and facts of recognition

A. The summary of the instant case pertains to the Plaintiff who leased a building to the Defendant, asserting that the Plaintiff is unable to reside due to leakage of the building during the lease period, and the director in the building would be entitled to seek damages, such as delivery of the building, which is the leased object, return of unjust enrichment equivalent to overdue rent, etc. from the date of the completion of delivery, and expenses for inspection of building safety, repair, etc., when cancelling the lease due to the Defendant’s overdue delay

(b) The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, and Eul evidence No. 18 and the entire pleadings:

1) On June 16, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) around June 16, 2014, the Defendant (the lessee is indicated as the Defendant’s wife in the lease contract (the evidence No. 3), but there is no dispute as to the fact that the lessee is the Defendant; (b) the lessee of the instant building is deemed the Defendant; (c) the lessee of the instant building and the instant building shall be deemed the Defendant); (d) the lease deposit deposit amount of KRW 10 million; (d) the monthly rent of KRW 650,00 (the payment date; and (e) the lease period from June 23 to June 22, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

A) Around June 23, 2014, the instant building was delivered to the Defendant. 2) Around October 8, 2014, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with D and Busan, the payment deposit of KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 500,000,000,000 and October 7, 2016, and concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant around October 15, 2014, with the term of the instant lease of KRW 10,000 and KRW 406 (hereinafter “E apartment 406”).

3. After October 20, 2014, the Defendant continued to accept the instant building from around July 2014 to the Plaintiff, thereby failing to comply with the request for repair, even though the Plaintiff requested to repair it on several occasions.

arrow