logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.04.09 2014가합35501
임대차보증금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendants co-ownership the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D major 381.8 square meters and the above ground buildings (hereinafter the above ground buildings).

B. On July 18, 2002, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with E to acquire the right of lease and other rights and facilities related to the instant restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) with respect to the instant building and the said restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).

C. Accordingly, on July 30, 2002, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B by setting the lease period from August 1, 2002 to August 1, 2007, from August 1, 2007, and from August 1, 2002 to December 31, 2002, the rent is KRW 3.6 million per month from August 1, 2002 to December 31, 2002.

The Plaintiff and Defendant B concluded a lease agreement on the instant building around August 2007 (from August 1, 2007 to July 31, 2009; KRW 30,000,000; KRW 3,500,000); and on February 24, 2009 (the lease term between August 1, 2009 and July 31, 2014; the deposit and rent are the same as the contract between August 24, 2007). Article 8 of the lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) which is the last lease term is stipulated as follows:

Article 8:A (Defendant B) will enter into a lease agreement with a third party when B (Plaintiff) transfers the leased building of this case to a third party during the term of the contract under the same conditions as above.

E. Pursuant to Article 8 of the above Special Agreement, the plaintiff and the defendants suffered damage from the telephone (Seoul Central District Court 2009No. 2041), which reflects the terms and conditions of the lease agreement of this case on November 30, 2009, including the following contents:

5. The respondent (Plaintiff) may exercise the right to purchase any accessory attached to the facility without the consent of the applicants (Defendants).

arrow