(영문) 춘천지방법원속초지원 2019.10.25 2019가단201350

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) 춘천지방법원속초지원 2019.10.25 2019가단201350

건물인도등 청구

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

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

(b) KRW 349,99 and as regards it, June 2019.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 23, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the lease of real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) with a rent of KRW 3.6 million per annum and KRW 3.6 million per annum from March 23, 2014 to 12 months from March 23, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “the instant lease”). At that time, the Plaintiff handed over the instant building to the Defendant.

B. On March 23, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant have renewed the instant lease agreement with the effect that the Plaintiff increased the rent to KRW 4.2 million per annum, and that the period from March 23, 2015 to December 12, 2015 was extended.

(A) No. 3-1 (c)

On March 23, 2016, the Plaintiff renewed the instant lease agreement with the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff increased the rent to KRW 7 million per annum; and (b) the period from March 23, 2016 to 24 months.

(A) No. 3-2) d.

After that, pursuant to Article 10(4) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, the instant lease agreement was extended until March 23, 2019, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the refusal of the renewal of the instant lease through content-certified mail around November 19, 2018, the previous lease agreement around December 12, 2018, and December 24, 2018.

(Evidences A) 4 to 6. [Evidence 4 to 6] / [Grounds for Recognition] , entry (including provisional number) of Evidences A 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition of the request for extradition, since the instant lease contract expired on March 23, 2019, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff.

As to this, the defendant alleged that he delivered the building of this case to the plaintiff, but even according to the defendant's argument, the evidence submitted by the defendant is insufficient to recognize that the defendant delivered the building of this case to the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the above argument by the defendant cannot be accepted.

3. The rent shall be reasonable; and

참조조문

-상가건물 임대차보호법 제10조 제4항

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 속초지원 2021.04.13 2020가단20533

-수원지방법원 2020.10.15 2020가단515127

-제주지방법원 2018.03.20 2017가단50449

-부산지방법원 2020.09.25 2019나60127

-광주지방법원 2015.08.18 2015가단11224