(영문) 청주지방법원 충주지원 2018.04.18 2017가단400

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) 청주지방법원 충주지원 2018.04.18 2017가단400

건물인도 등

Text

1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) is the single floor of the lightweight C, lightweight C, light steel framed, and the single roof to the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

Reasons

The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to have been filed.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 1, 2010, the Plaintiff: (a) leased the lease deposit amounting to KRW 10 million, monthly rent, and two years; (b) concluded a lease contract with the Defendant on August 1, 2012 with regard to the same real estate again with the lease deposit amounting to KRW 5 million, monthly rent, and KRW 500,000,000 with regard to the same real estate (hereinafter “instant lease contract”); and (c) returned KRW 5 million,000,000,000 from the existing lease deposit amount to KRW 5 million; and (d) returned KRW 5 million from the existing lease deposit.

In the instant lease agreement, there was a stipulation that “a contract shall be destroyed at the time of unpaid rent for a period of three months.”

B. On August 1, 2012, the Defendant, upon entering into the instant lease agreement, prepared a “cash storage certificate” stating that the amount of KRW 9 million for the rent of 18 months that was not paid at the time of the following contract was settled at the time.

C. The Defendant did not pay the rent for 18 months from February 2, 2011 to July 2012, and even thereafter, did not pay the rent as of February 5, 2015;

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5, Eul evidence No. 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. According to the facts found in the determination as to the cause of claim, since the Defendant did not pay the instant lease on four occasions, including May 2015, 2015, November 2015, 2016, January 1, 2016, and February 2016 after the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the instant lease agreement was terminated on February 14, 2017, which included the purport that the Plaintiff would terminate the instant lease agreement to the Defendant at the latest in accordance with the terms and conditions of the relevant special agreement.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to restore the instant store to its original state and deliver it to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion 1 as to the defendant's argument

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 충주지원 2018.04.27 2017가단400 (1)

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2015.05.12 2014가단12430

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2017.12.13 2017가단33045

-대구지방법원김천지원 2019.04.03 2018가단5610

-제주지방법원 2019.01.29 2018가단9288