(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.08.31 2017가단8217

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) 대구지방법원 2017.08.31 2017가단8217

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant is paid KRW 20,000,000 from the plaintiff, and at the same time, it is out of the first floor of the building indicated in the attached Table to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 20, 2012, the Plaintiff received lease deposit amounting to KRW 20,50,000 for the leased portion of KRW 44.925 square meters (hereinafter “the instant real property”) connected each point of Section 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 1 in sequence, among the first floor of the building listed in the attached list, from March 20, 2012 to March 20, 2017, and leased the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000 for the leased property, from March 20 to March 20, 2017.

B. On March 20, 2017, the lease term between the Plaintiff and the Defendant expired.

[Ground] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the lease between the Plaintiff and the Defendant ends, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant asserts to the purport that the Plaintiff, a lessee, may demand the renewal of the contract to the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is unjustifiable on the grounds that there are no grounds for rejection of renewal under the law. However, there are no materials or evidence to deem that the lease between the Plaintiff and the Defendant has to be renewed or renewed, and the above assertion is without merit. 2) The Defendant’s assertion to the effect that the Plaintiff cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim

As seen earlier, the Defendant paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and upon termination of the lease, the obligation to return the leased object and the obligation to return the leased deposit are in the simultaneous performance relationship.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is justified.

C. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff simultaneously with receiving KRW 20,000,000 from the Plaintiff as the lease deposit.

3. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim is accepted within the scope of the above recognition.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2015.03.25 2014가단517480

-창원지방법원통영지원 2014.12.18 2014가단3664

-인천지방법원 2019.01.23 2017가단230887

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2015.08.13 2014가단3145

-창원지방법원통영지원 2015.01.29 2014가단11801