logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.10.25 2019나56838
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

Basic Facts

On December 15, 2004, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant stating that “the Plaintiff shall rent KRW 25,000,000 and KRW 700,000 in monthly rent” (hereinafter referred to as “the lease of this case”) from the Defendant with respect to Seongbuk-si, Sungnam-si, and Seoho (hereinafter referred to as “the instant commercial building”), and operated the said real estate brokerage office from around that time.

Since then, the Defendant continued to renew the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff on January 26, 2016, and finally increased to KRW 1,500,000 as the monthly rent, and entered into a renewal agreement regarding the said lease agreement from January 31, 2016 to January 31, 2017.

(A) After September 21, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that he would not renew the instant lease agreement, and returned KRW 2,500,000, which was part of the lease deposit, on September 29, 2016.

On October 27, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the purport that “The opportunity to recover the premium is guaranteed by allowing the Plaintiff to act as a new lessee, or the period of lease is extended to two years on the same condition.” On November 3, 2016, the Defendant issued a notice including the content of “the instant notice” (hereinafter “instant notice”), not subject to preservation of the premium, to the Plaintiff by means of a mail proving the content of the premium, because it is not an intention to succeed to the return’s business.

(A) No. 3-2. On November 14, 2016, the Plaintiff again notified the Defendant that “an opportunity to recover the premium would be guaranteed,” and on which November 28, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that “a forced act demanding premium to be paid is a wife against the upper limit, even though it is necessary to use the premium in question.”

(A) No. 3-4). The defendant can set the deadline for the delivery of the commercial building of this case to the plaintiff after the termination of the instant lease agreement.

arrow