(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.10.16 2017가단60057

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) 울산지방법원 2018.10.16 2017가단60057

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

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

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. At the time of June 10, 2012, Defendant D, the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as of June 10, 201, the lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million, KRW 300,000 per month, and KRW 3300,000 per month, and the lease term of the instant real estate from June 10, 2012 to June 10, 2017. However, the lessee entered into a lease agreement with F, the type of the leased property (Evidence 2), and thereafter, operated a restaurant with the name of “G” after delivery of the instant real estate from E.

B. The Plaintiffs acquired the instant real estate through sale on December 4, 2015, and completed the registration procedure for transfer of ownership in their names.

C. When Defendant D, the actual lessee of the instant real estate, requested the preparation of a new lease agreement that Defendant D, the Defendants as the Defendants, and the lessor also needs to change to the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants maintain the contents of the previous lease agreement on March 10, 2016, including lease deposit, monthly rent, contract period, etc. However, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants maintained the terms of the previous lease agreement, but they are the Plaintiffs, the lessee as the Defendants, and the lessee as the Defendants, respectively, and verify that the portion of the first floor extension without permission was operated after the restoration to the original state

(Liability for the violating building shall be borne by the lessee)

8. Recontract may be concluded after the expiration of the contract and shall be entered into with the lessor at the time of wishes for the transfer; and

“The instant lease agreement was made by means of a new lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and a notary public was notarized by the law firm H 414 (No. 3) from April 4, 2017. The Plaintiffs paid the Defendants the removal of unlawful buildings, unpaid monthly taxes, water taxes, etc. as stipulated in the instant lease agreement by means of content-proof mail from April 4, 2017 to several times. In the event that the Defendants did not perform this, the Plaintiffs were to refuse to renew the instant lease agreement and to take legal measures.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원서부지원 2019.02.14 2018가합102251

-울산지방법원 2015.01.22 2013가합1606

-서울북부지방법원 2016.05.12 2014가단46447 (1)

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.07 2015가단5395234

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.30 2018가단5076251