logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2018.07.25 2017나52952
건물명도
Text

1. Of the part on the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, the part on the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is below.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 15, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant and the Plaintiff, setting the lease term as three years from March 15, 2014 to March 15, 2017, and KRW 300,000 per month (payment on March 15, 201) without a deposit, of part of the building on the attached list owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On April 20, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to expand the leased object of the said lease to the instant building, and the term of lease shall be from April 20, 2014 to April 20, 2017, and the rent shall be increased from May 20, 2014 to KRW 50,000 per month (payment on May 20, 201) (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. On March 20, 2014, the Defendant registered his/her business with the trade name “E” in the instant building, and suspended the restaurant from January 25, 2016, and until the date of closing argument in the instant case, the Defendant occupied the instant building.

[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence No. 1, 2, 7, Evidence No. 3, Evidence No. 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. On September 2015, the Plaintiff agreed to increase the rent of the instant lease agreement with the Defendant to KRW 600,000 per month. However, the Defendant, without the Plaintiff’s consent, performed interior works on the instant building without the Defendant’s consent, and forced the Plaintiff to pay the Plaintiff the fees for interior and outdoor facilities installation despite having provided the Defendant’s duty to restore. Furthermore, the Defendant did not pay the rent a total of KRW 1.2 million as of February 2016 and expressed the intention to pay only the rent of KRW 300,000 per month. Accordingly, on February 11, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease was terminated on the ground of the Defendant’s breach of duty as the lessee.

arrow