logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.06.28 2017나209724
건물명도
Text

1.The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the principal claim shall be modified as follows:

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim).

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On the underground floor of the instant building, there are sections (a) and (b) (hereinafter “instant section”) indicating the current status of the building (hereinafter “instant section”). The space is divided into sections (a) and (b) by the wall (attached Form 2), and a collective revision is installed in the said Section (b).

C. Around 2001, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to lease the part of the instant case (a) (hereinafter “the first lease contract”) with the contracting party as the deceased C (the Defendant’s husband’s death on January 22, 2015) (hereinafter “the Defendant”) and operated the game hall by receiving delivery of the said part (a).

However, around 2003, the Plaintiff removed the wall between the Section (a) and the Section (b) of this case, and performed a waterproof construction on the Section (b) of this case. At that time, the Defendant has operated the main points in the Section (a) and the Section (b) with the consent of the Plaintiff to use the said Section (b).

E. Meanwhile, the first lease contract was explicitly renewed even after the termination of the lease term. On October 18, 2006, the original Defendant entered into a lease contract that changed the deposit amount of KRW 5,000,000 per month, KRW 600,000 per month, and the lease term from November 1, 2006 to November 1, 2007. On July 31, 2010, the first lease contract changed the deposit amount of KRW 5,000,000, KRW 750,000 per month, and KRW 24 months from July 31, 2010 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

In addition, even after the lease term expires, the lease of this case has been implicitly renewed.

F. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff the rent up to September 2015 pursuant to the instant lease agreement, but did not pay the rent thereafter.

G. The Plaintiff is a vehicle with at least three weeks.

arrow