logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.08.21 2014가단25145 (1)
건물인도 등
Text

1. The defendant,

A. At the same time, the Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the appointed parties receive KRW 2,804,318 from them.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 31, 2013, the Plaintiff, etc. leased each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant buildings”) to the Defendant as KRW 127,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 6,500,000 (Additional Tax) and the lease term of KRW 24 months from March 31, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Around that time, the Plaintiff, etc. paid KRW 127,00,000 for the lease deposit.

In the instant lease agreement agreement, the purport of the Defendant’s termination of the lease agreement at least twice in arrears is stated.

B. On July 18, 2014, the Plaintiff et al. notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease on the grounds of delinquency in rent for six months, and the said notification reached the Defendant around that time.

C. The Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff, etc. KRW 38,90,000 in total (i.e., KRW 4,00,000 among KRW 7,150,000) and KRW 35,750,00 in total from May to October, 2014 (i.e., KRW 7,150,000 x 5 months). As of March 28, 2015, the Defendant unpaid management expenses of KRW 63,845,682 in total (i.e., KRW 29,643,927 in total) (i.e., KRW 34,201,75 in total).

After the conclusion of the lease contract of this case, the Defendant operates a health club with the trade name C in each of the building of this case from the date of closing the argument of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 12, 13, and 17 (including additional numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts as to the request for extradition, the instant lease contract was terminated on July 18, 2014 by the notice of termination of the contract of this case, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver each of the instant buildings to the Plaintiff, etc., barring any special circumstance.

The defendant asserts that the unpaid rent, etc. does not exceed the deposit for lease, and it shall be deemed as a simultaneous performance defense that the plaintiff, etc. cannot respond to the request for extradition until the refund of the deposit for lease was made.

The defendant is the plaintiff et al.

arrow