logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.03.28 2016가단29514
건물명도등
Text

1. The defendant connects the plaintiff with each point of 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1 among the indication of the real estate building stated in the attached Form to the plaintiff in sequence.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence No. 1 and No. 4 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on August 20, 201 on the part inside the ship (hereinafter referred to as "the instant store") of KRW 26.4m2,00 won, monthly rent, and lease period of KRW 3 million, monthly rent, and two years. The plaintiff and the defendant entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on August 20, 201 as to the instant store again with the contents of the said lease agreement after the expiration of the lease period of two years after the expiration of the above lease period of the instant store, and the plaintiff and the defendant maintain the lease agreement with the defendant on August 20, 2015 at the expiration of the lease period of two years after the expiration of the lease period of the instant store, and on August 20, 2015, the lease agreement of this case was terminated by no later than 26 months after the expiration of the lease period of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the lease period of this case").

According to the above facts, since the lease contract of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the termination period, the defendant is obligated to deliver the store of this case to the plaintiff, and to pay unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 300 million per month from August 21, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the store of this case.

2. The judgment on the Defendant’s assertion was made after completing a five-year rental contract for the instant store, and there was a verbal agreement to guarantee the rental period of 12 months during the re-contract process, but in fact, an additional five-year rental period was to be guaranteed. The Defendant trusted this amount of KRW 3 million for remodeling costs, and he spets accumulated in the carpets offered in the instant store.

arrow