(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.06 2015가단5178804

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.06 2015가단5178804

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) Attached drawings among the first floor of the real estate stated in the attached Form shall be indicated in (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and (7);

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 30, 2006, the Plaintiffs entered into a lease contract with the Defendant for the first time with regard to the portion of (a) indication on the ship attached to the attached Table No. 1, (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), and (1) the part of (a) indication on the ship connected with each point in sequence No. 308.86m2 (hereinafter “instant commercial building”). On August 30, 2009, the Plaintiffs entered into the lease contract with regard to the instant commercial building by setting the lease deposit No. 216,00,000, monthly management fee No. 1,118,000 (excluding value-added tax), and from August 30, 2009 to August 30, 2010 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

B. Although the instant lease agreement was continuously renewed, the Defendant delayed the payment of the monthly rent for the instant lease agreement to the Plaintiffs, and the Defendant expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on February 28, 2014 to the Defendant on the grounds that the amount of the monthly rent in arrears was over 2 years, and the Plaintiffs expressed his/her intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on March 3, 2014.

C. When settling accounts as of February 28, 2014 that the amount of arrears is deducted from the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement, the unpaid amount is KRW 67,977,869, and the water rate of the instant commercial building used and paid by the Defendant from March 28, 2014 to August 2015 is KRW 3,758,130.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the lease contract of this case was terminated by the plaintiffs' declaration of termination on the ground of the defendant's default of rent. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to deliver the commercial building of this case to the plaintiffs.

In addition, the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiffs under the instant lease agreement on February 28, 2014.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.07.22 2015가단46482

-수원지방법원 2016.04.28 2015가단47200

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.02 2015가단5386025

-의정부지방법원 2017.09.14 2016가단36669

-수원지방법원 2016.08.17 2015가단32208