logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.01.10 2018가단5221
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. Defendant C:

(a) The second floor of the multi-family house (six households) of the building indicated in the attached list of the attached list is approximately D in the south of 205.10 square meters.

Reasons

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged in each of the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2.

(1) On April 11, 2012, Defendant C owned the instant lease agreement under the name of the Defendant B, who is a son, without any authority, and occupied and used the instant building portion, with approximately KRW 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

d. The instant house was entirely transferred to F on May 20, 2014, and the Plaintiff succeeded to the lessor’s status under the lease agreement on the instant building by purchasing the instant house on October 27, 2017.

Secondly, from October 27, 2017, Defendant C delayed payment of the rent for the instant building from October 27, 2017, and the Plaintiff expressed his intention to terminate the said lease on the ground that the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case did not pay more than three times of the rent.

x. If Defendant C deducts the monthly rent in arrears from the instant lease deposit, only the monthly rent remains after March 18, 2018.

2. The Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant B against the Plaintiff on the ground that the instant lease contract was terminated on the ground that Defendant B did not pay rent for not less than three years on the premise that Defendant B entered into the instant lease contract. Defendant B filed a claim against the Plaintiff for the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated by the rate of KRW 230,000 per month from March 18, 2018 to the delivery of the said building portion.

The evidence No. 2, which corresponds to the assertion that Defendant B entered into the instant lease agreement, is admitted as the authenticity.

arrow