logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.12 2017나84398
건물명도
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s principal claim and the trial.

Reasons

1. The reasons for this part of this Court's reasoning are as follows: "1. Basic facts" among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the part of "1. Basic facts"; therefore, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. (1) The plaintiff asserted that, without the plaintiff's consent, the defendant transferred the commercial building of this case to E without permission, the plaintiff terminated the lease contract of this case on the ground of the transfer without permission, and since the lease contract of this case expired, the defendant is obligated to deliver the commercial building of this case to the plaintiff.

(2) As to this, the Defendant asserts that, not only the Plaintiff’s agent consented to the instant sub-lease contract between the Defendant and E, but also the F, a broker of the instant lease contract, consented to the instant sub-lease as the Plaintiff’s sub-lease. As such, the instant sub-lease contract was concluded with the Plaintiff’s consent. Since the instant lease contract was renewed upon the Defendant’s request for renewal of the contract, the Plaintiff’s termination of the instant lease contract and the rejection

B. (1) Whether C, the Plaintiff’s agent, consented to the instant sub-lease contract (A) and the most important issue is whether C, the Plaintiff’s agent, consented to the instant sub-lease contract. Accordingly, in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings, the following: (a) the Plaintiff, the lessee, and the lessee, the deposit amount of KRW 10,00,00,00 on August 8, 2015, the date when the instant lease contract was concluded; (b) the lease agreement on the instant commercial building (hereinafter “E lease agreement”) was written on the date when C, the Plaintiff’s seal imprint was affixed to C, the Plaintiff’s name, the lessor, and the report on the occupancy in the name of the lessee E, was made in the commercial building management office.

arrow