logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.11.11 2015가단30463
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The assertion;

A. The Plaintiffs leased from the Defendants the first floor and the second floor (limited to the instant building) among the building on the land of 371m2 in Daegu Jung-gu, Daegu-gu, and the Defendants filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs as Daegu District Court 2010No20683.

B. The Defendants and the Plaintiffs in the above lawsuit

1. The Plaintiffs paid the Defendants the unpaid rental fee of KRW 139.6 million (not later than December 201), and KRW 50 million among which KRW 17.9 million shall be paid until January 31, 201; KRW 17.920,000,000 until April 30, 2011; KRW 1,7920,000 until July 31, 2011; KRW 1,7920,00 until October 31, 201; KRW 1,7920,00 until October 31, 201; and KRW 1,7920,00 until January 31, 2012;

2. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants enter into a lease agreement between January 1, 201 and January 31, 2014 regarding the instant building, setting the lease deposit of KRW 160 million and KRW 2720,000,000 for monthly rent, respectively.

3. The lease contract is terminated where the plaintiffs delay the payment of the unpaid rent under the above Paragraph (1) or the payment of the rent under the above Paragraph (2) is not paid twice or more.

“Any adjustment, including content, was made.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant conciliation”)

C. On October 31, 2014, regarding the instant conciliation, the Plaintiffs issued an order to the Defendants to guide the instant building and paid the monthly rent up to that time.

However, based on the instant protocol, the Defendants seized corporeal movables as the Seoul Central District Court 2015No. 2015No. 3525, based on the claim of KRW 19,424,468 (unpaid monthly rent of KRW 14,515,618 for the delivery of real estate - the removal cost of KRW 2,439,850 - the recovered amount of KRW 1,400) against the Plaintiffs.

Therefore, since compulsory execution by the Defendants under the instant conciliation protocol is not permissible, the Plaintiffs seek a judgment as stated in the purport of the claim.

2. During the process of the instant lawsuit, the Defendants paid all the deposit liability under the name of the monetary payment obligation under the instant conciliation clause and the delivery and execution of the building under the instant conciliation clause.

arrow