(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2017.11.24 2017가단208231

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) 수원지방법원성남지원 2017.11.24 2017가단208231

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

Facts of recognition

On February 28, 2014, the Plaintiff leased (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) a building listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant under the terms of KRW 50,000,000 as deposit money, the lease period from February 28, 2014 to June 29, 2016, and KRW 4,730,00 as monthly rent (including value-added tax).

Since that time, the Defendant had occupied and used the instant building to the present date and operated a motor vehicle maintenance business entity, and it has been in arrears from July 10, 2016 to the present date.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings are as follows. According to the above fact-finding, the defendant may terminate the lease contract of this case. Thus, the plaintiff may terminate the lease contract of this case. The plaintiff's termination of the lease contract of this case by the lawsuit of this case and delivery of a copy of the complaint to the defendant on April 24, 2017 is obvious in the record. Thus, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant alleged that he did not pay the rent because he refused to renew the lease contract of this case on the ground that the plaintiff did not repay the borrowed money, and thus was unable to operate the business. However, it is insufficient to recognize the defendant's argument only by the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3. There is no other evidence to acknowledge

Furthermore, as long as the Defendant continues to occupy and use the instant building, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s obligation to pay rent is exempted solely on the ground that the Plaintiff refused to renew the instant lease agreement.

The defendant's argument is without merit.

In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 2019.09.04 2019가단2417

-서울동부지방법원 2020.06.16 2019가단117294

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.06.19 2014가단4807

-서울동부지방법원 2018.07.04 2017가단18225

-수원지방법원안산지원 2017.11.17 2016가단22110