logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2015.03.31 2014가단9419
건물명도
Text

1. On February 2 from the day following the closing of argument in this case among the plaintiff's lawsuit in this case to the delivery date of the building indicated in the attached list.

Reasons

1. Judgment on the ground for the plaintiff's claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of evidence No. 1, evidence No. 4-1, and evidence No. 4-1, the Plaintiff purchased a building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) from July 3, 201 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 11, 201, and the Plaintiff, a lessee on July 19, 201, leased the instant building to the Defendant, who was the former lessee on July 19, 201, by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 45 million, monthly rent of KRW 2 million, and the lease deposit was succeeded to the lease deposit paid to the former owner C until July 19, 2013, and the lease deposit is also acknowledged that the Defendant agreed to set the lease deposit with the former owner C including the lease term of the former owner C (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

Therefore, the instant lease agreement has expired after July 19, 2013, which is the expiration date, and the expiration date has expired. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

B. Part 1 of the claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, which the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the rent under the instant lease agreement from the date of the closing of argument to the date of the closing of argument in the instant case. Thus, there is no dispute between the parties, and the part of the Plaintiff seeking the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from the day after the delivery of the copy of the complaint in the instant case to the day of closing of argument in the instant case is without merit. 2) The part claiming the return of unjust enrichment from the day following the closing of argument in the instant case to the day after the delivery of the instant building from the day after the date after the closing of argument in the instant case to the day of delivering the instant building

arrow