(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.07.28 2016가단32

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) 대전지방법원 2016.07.28 2016가단32

무단점용현수막광고철거

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the 6th floor building of reinforced concrete structure B on the Seo-gu Daejeon District (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On May 28, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the Defendant, setting the six-story of the instant building to be KRW 10 million for deposit for lease, KRW 600,000 for rent, and the lease period from August 1, 2014 to July 31, 2017.

C. On April 20, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the lease of five of the instant building by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 16 million for the lease deposit, KRW 600,000 for the rent, and the lease period from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2020. On the same day, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for the extension of the lease term for the six of the instant building by June 30, 2020.

However, each of the above special terms and conditions of the lease agreement on April 20, 2015 stipulated that the lessee agrees to allow the tenant to advertise the banner desired by the lessee respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant special agreement”). (e)

After that, the Defendant installed the advertisement of banner as stated in the purport of the claim on the rooftop of the instant building (hereinafter “instant banner advertisement”) and used it until now.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings is merely the purport that the special agreement of this case can put a banner only on the leased part of the building of this case. Thus, without the plaintiff's consent, the defendant installed the advertisement of banner of this case on the rooftop of the building of this case.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant banner advertisement to the Plaintiff and pay the Plaintiff a sum of KRW 2.4 million as the return of unjust enrichment from the use of the instant banner without permission.

The defendant's assertion of this case is a banner at the place desired by the defendant among the buildings of this case.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원마산지원 2020.06.23 2020가단100782

-부산지방법원 2017.08.08 2017가단2492

-수원지방법원안산지원 2019.02.01 2018가단52351

-대구지방법원 2015.12.17 2015가합1899

-부산지방법원 2017.08.08 2017가단10769