logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2019.11.26 2019가단203650
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

1. On May 26, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant’s mother B (hereinafter “the instant building”) on the lease term of the building indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) which is permanent rental housing between June 2016 and August 31, 2018 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”). The Deceased died on June 29, 2017 during the instant lease agreement, and the Defendant inherited the Deceased, and the facts that the Defendant currently resides in the instant building do not conflict with the parties, or may be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of pleadings as to the written evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3.

According to the above facts, the instant lease agreement has expired on August 31, 2018, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Although the Defendant alleged that he did not make a move-in report on the instant building, but actually resided together with the deceased, it is unreasonable to refuse the Defendant’s request for renewal and to transfer the building solely on the ground that the Plaintiff was not a move-in report, and thus, the Defendant still has the right to live in the instant building based on the validity of the instant lease contract.

B. In the judgment, the building of this case is a permanent rental house under Article 2 subparag. 1 (a) of the Special Act on Public Housing and Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 8(11) of the Plaintiff’s “former Management and Management Standards for Rental Housing” established pursuant to Article 13(3) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act should be cancelled or terminated if the contractor is deceased and it is impossible to maintain the contract.

arrow