(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.01.10 2016가단24441

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 2017.01.10 2016가단24441

건물인도 등

Text

1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) Attached drawings among the four floors of the real estate stated in the attached Form (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and (7);

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 25, 2015, the Plaintiffs concluded a lease agreement between the Defendant and the terms that with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 6,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 450,000 (pre-paid on October 29, 2015), and the term of the contract from October 29, 2015 to October 28, 2017, the lessor may terminate the contract if the lessee delays the payment of rent at least twice, and the lease agreement between KRW 6,00,000,000, out of KRW 1,000,000,000, whichever is later, shall be paid by February 29, 2016.

B. On February 29, 2016, the Defendant did not pay KRW 1,000,000,000, which was to be paid by February 29, 2016. The Plaintiffs and the Defendant set the deposit amount at KRW 5,000,000, and the monthly rent at KRW 470,000 from February 29, 2016.

C. The Defendant paid the Plaintiffs KRW 2,350,00,00 on October 30, 2015, and KRW 450,00 on December 3, 2015, and KRW 700,000 on March 3, 2016, and KRW 2,350,000 on March 14, 2016, and KRW 50,000 on May 3, 2016.

The Plaintiffs urged the Defendant to pay rent and notified the termination of the lease contract.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the defendant notified the plaintiffs that the lease contract will be terminated due to the delinquency in paying the monthly rent, the lease contract between the plaintiffs and the defendant was terminated.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiffs.

B. The defendant asserts that since the deposit remains, the termination of the lease contract and the demand for delivery of real estate are unreasonable.

However, since the lease deposit is delivered to secure the rent and the obligation of other lessee arising from the time when the lessee delivers the object after the termination of the lease contract, it is not possible for the lessee to refuse to pay the rent and the overdue rent on the ground that the lease deposit exists.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2016.09.28 2016가단11648

-대전지방법원 2017.05.25 2016가단29699

-창원지방법원마산지원 2015.12.04 2015가합373 (1)

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.29 2017가단60728

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.11.29 2017가단3987