logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2018.11.22 2018나138
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is the owner of C’s 1st floor D’s retail store of reinforced concrete of 101.61m2 (hereinafter “instant store”).

The Defendant agreed to the termination of the lease contract with the former lessee upon the request of the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “former lessee”) to terminate the lease contract by January 2018 or by December 2016.

B. On August 2016, the Plaintiff wanted to rent the instant store to the Defendant, and the Defendant stated that the former lessee would move until December 25, 2016, and that the former lessee could delay due to the circumstances of the former lessee.

C. On August 11, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the instant store (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) and paid the Defendant a down payment of KRW 2 million on August 22, 2016.

The remainder of KRW 18 million shall be paid to the lessor at the time of the contract, and the remainder of KRW 18 million shall be paid on December 25, 2016.

b. On December 25, 2016, an explanation of Article 3 real estate will be made on December 25, 2016

b. Article 4: The time limit for the lease on a deposit basis shall be 36 months from the date of ordering the lessee to surrender the real estate. Article 7 of the Act provides that if the lessee has entered into this contract, twice the amount received as the down payment shall be given to the lessee, and if the lessee has entered into this contract, the down payment shall be null and void and shall not be claimed to return it

However, efforts shall be made to lease prior to the payment date of the balance and, if so, shall not claim the penalty for the contract even if the lease period is delayed.

The lessee of the instant store was unable to open the store until December 25, 2016, which is the remainder date, and the Defendant was unable to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff within the said period, and the Plaintiff additionally stated in the contract whether to deliver the instant store to the Defendant by the time.

arrow