logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.09.15 2015가단19484
건물명도
Text

1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. India from January 28, 2015

Reasons

On February 28, 2013, the Plaintiffs leased real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Defendant on the 28th day of each month after the agreement to pay the lease deposit amount of KRW 1 million and KRW 700,000 per month. The Defendant began to delay the lease from January 2015 to January 28, 2015 (the rent as of January 28, 2015) and the fact that the copy of the instant complaint for which the Plaintiffs seeking the termination of the lease contract was served on the Defendant on May 22, 2015 can be recognized. Accordingly, the lease contract between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant was terminated, and the Defendant, as a duty to restore, ordered the Plaintiffs to order the real estate listed in the separate sheet, and ordered the disposition No. 1-B.

have an obligation to pay the money stated in the subsection.

Although the defendant asserts that he will receive the price of supply from his place of delivery as soon as possible, it is not a reason to reject the plaintiffs' claim.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow