(영문) 수원지방법원 2021.02.18 2020가단500514

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2021.02.18 2020가단500514

임대차보증금

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 29, 2018, the Plaintiff (a renter) and the Defendant (a lessor) concluded a lease agreement with the following terms (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The land marked as real estate: The building with the Namyang-si, Gyeonggi-do: the building with the size of 330 square meters on the ground: the part on which approximately 232 square meters of residential facilities of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant building”) consisting of approximately 232 square meters of residential facilities of the specific structure adjacent to the above ground iron bars: the entire area of 232 square meters;

2. Deposit for contract terms: 150,000,000 won: 10,000 won per month, and the period of the first day of each month: (i) from October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2023 (special agreement terms and conditions) (60 months) shall be leased at present;

3. The area to be leased shall be the area for exclusive use by public account books or total floor area;

4. The lease term shall be five years.

5. They shall return to their original state upon expiration of the lease;

6. Parking lots shall be used for public purposes;

B. On October 26, 2018, the Plaintiff registered a business operator with the trade name D from the instant building, and began the business of a long-term restaurant from November 2018.

(c)

The instant building site is adjacent to the road owned by Namyang-si (hereinafter “the instant building site”), and the Plaintiff used the instant building site and part of the instant Si maintenance as the parking lot.

In July 2019, Namyang-si installed a pen in the instant Si maintenance around July 2019, and the Plaintiff became unable to use the instant Si maintenance as a parking lot thereafter.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The primary assertion (Cancellation of Fraud) was that the extent of 1/2 of the site of the instant parking lot was part of the maintenance of the city, and that the Defendant had a duty to notify the Plaintiff of the situation that it is prohibited from using at any time in the Namyang-si, which manages the maintenance of the city, and caused the Plaintiff to enter into the instant lease agreement by deceiving the Plaintiff without permission.

The plaintiff is aware of the defendant's deception through the service of the complaint of this case.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2015.02.06 2013가단43161

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.14 2015가합526641

-수원지방법원 2018.01.09 2017구합66276

-의정부지방법원 2017.11.22 2017가합50768

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2016.05.25 2015고단1907