(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.06.17 2014나2345 | 리걸엔진

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) 창원지방법원 2015.06.17 2014나2345

건물명도 등

Text

1. The part against the defendant exceeding the following part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the above part shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 13, 2011, the Plaintiff leased the instant building to the Defendant for a fixed period of two years from March 13, 201 to March 12, 2013, with a deposit of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,200,000, and the lease period of the instant building from March 13, 201 to March 12, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the rent from November 13, 2012, and only KRW 3,600,000, the rent for the subsequent three months, was paid to the Plaintiff.

C. On April 2013, the Plaintiff expressed to the Defendant the intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent.

The Plaintiff was handed over the instant building according to the judgment of the first instance, which was sentenced to the provisional execution on April 15, 2014, after the judgment of the first instance was rendered.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts acknowledged before the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement is deemed to have been lawfully terminated on the ground of the Defendant’s delay. As such, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, and as the Plaintiff seeks from November 13, 2012 to December 12, 2013, which is 12,000,000 won (1,20,000 won x 10 months) in arrears or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent during the 13-month period from November 13, 2012 to December 12, 2013, and from December 13, 2013 to December 1, 2003 to the delivery of the said building.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to the assertion related to India, the Defendant asserted that since the Defendant delivered the instant building to the Plaintiff around January 2014, unjust enrichment equivalent to rent and rent should be calculated as of January 2014, and that the Plaintiff’s request for delivery of the instant building should be dismissed.

However, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant delivered the building of this case around the end of January 2014, and the defendant had already delivered the building of this case according to provisional execution, but the fact that the building of this case was already delivered by the defendant.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.11.29 2018가단9106

-의정부지방법원 2015.12.18 2015나8873

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.10.22 2015가단1966

-울산지방법원 2014.10.24 2014가단19683

-수원지방법원안산지원 2016.02.23 2015가단111952