(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.09.17 2015가단8502

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) 부산지방법원 2015.09.17 2015가단8502

건물명도 등

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The party's assertion and its judgment

A. (1) On January 25, 2005, C, the former owner of the instant real estate, as the Plaintiff, has leased the instant real estate to the Defendant with a deposit of three million won and KRW 1 million per month, and had it leased to the Defendant at implied renewal. The Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate on or around October 2014, and notified the Defendant by verbal or telephone, etc. to the effect that the said lease contract should not be renewed to the Defendant from Oct. 24, 2015, before the termination of the said lease contract, from Oct. 24, 2015, the said lease contract was terminated as of Jan. 24, 2015, and thus, the Defendant has the same obligation as the written claim to the Plaintiff.

(2) The Defendant did not receive notification as alleged by the Plaintiff, and the implied renewal was made accordingly, and the above lease relationship remains in existence until January 24, 2017, and the Defendant does not have any obligation to respond to the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. (1) Article 6(1) of the Housing Lease Protection Act provides that if a lessor fails to notify the lessee of the refusal of the renewal, or to notify the lessee that the lessee would not renew the lease without any change in the terms and conditions, the lease shall be deemed to have been renewed under the same conditions as the former one at the time the term expires. In this case, there is insufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the refusal of the renewal of the said lease or the notification to the effect that the renewal would not be renewed without any change in the terms and conditions of the said lease within the said period. Therefore, the said lease was renewed for two years from January 25, 2015.

(2) Since the Defendant appears to have paid the monthly rent under the above lease agreement to the Plaintiff, the part on the claim for money is also rejected.

2. The plaintiff's claims are all dismissed according to the conclusion.

참조조문

-주택임대차보호법 제6조 제1항

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2014.10.31 2013가단37242

-인천지방법원부천지원 2015.02.06 2014가합8584

-대전지방법원 2016.11.29 2016가단213975

-서울서부지방법원 2017.06.01 2016가단28128

-의정부지방법원 2017.11.10 2017가단107483