(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2019.01.10 2018가단30579

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) 창원지방법원진주지원 2019.01.10 2018가단30579

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiffs the real estate stated in the separate sheet.

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

3...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D, E, and F shared 1/3 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) and sold it to the Plaintiffs on November 7, 2017. The Plaintiffs completed the registration of ownership transfer as to 1/2 shares of the instant building on December 29, 2017, respectively.

B. After obtaining permission from D for the use of the instant building on June 2015, the Defendant repaired the instant building and resided in a mother G and the second floor of the instant building, and operated a restaurant on the first floor.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 6, Eul evidence 4 and 9, each of the images of Eul evidence 1 to 3, Eul witness D's testimony and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) The defendant has occupied the building of this case after obtaining permission from D, which is the former owner of the building of this case, to use the building of this case free of charge. This is merely a loan for use, and the defendant is obligated to return the building of this case to the plaintiffs, who are the owner of the building of this case. Even if a lease contract (Evidence No. 6 and 8) as alleged by the defendant was concluded between D and D, the defendant did not pay a rent to the lessor, and thus the plaintiff was not obliged to return the building of this case to the plaintiffs. 2) The defendant's assertion that the defendant, around June 2015, entered into a lease contract with D by setting the lease term of five years from D and did not pay a lease deposit or rent, instead of the defendant, agreed to repair and use the building of this case.

Since the Defendant completed resident registration and had an opposing power to reside in the building of this case, the Plaintiffs, the assignee of the building of this case, succeeded to the status of lessor D.

B. The Defendant asserted that the lease contract was concluded with D, and submitted the evidence Nos. 6 and 8.

However, the evidence No. 7 is used.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2017.06.27 2016가단216356

-인천지방법원 2016.09.21 2016가단228573

-서울동부지방법원 2016.06.29 2015가단47656

-광주지방법원 2015.04.03 2014가단523133

-대구지방법원김천지원 2019.08.22 2018가단35895