(영문) 수원지방법원여주지원 2017.09.14 2017가단1587

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) 수원지방법원여주지원 2017.09.14 2017가단1587

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

(b) From July 14, 2017, KRW 900,00 and KRW 900.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 5, 2014, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 110,000 (after January 21, 201), and the period from the delivery date to November 21, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. The Defendant, transferred on November 14, 2014 from the Plaintiff, has possessed and used the instant real estate so far. At least three times a month, the sum of the instant real estate is KRW 20,900,000 as of July 13, 2017.

C. On April 4, 2017, a copy of the instant complaint containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds of delinquency in rent was served on the Defendant.

[Evidence Evidence: The descriptions of Evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim for delivery, since the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated by the plaintiff's declaration of termination on the ground of overdue delay, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff.

B. 1) The plaintiff asserts that (A) the plaintiff is obligated to pay monthly rent regardless of the auction procedure for the real estate in this case; (b) the plaintiff is not obliged to pay rent to the plaintiff with the amount of money as stated in the purport of the claim as unjust enrichment equivalent to monthly rent or rent; and (B) the defendant asserts that the plaintiff can have been in arrears if he withdraws the auction, and that even if he deducts the rent, the amount of rent 20 million won remains at the time of the closing of the argument in this case.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2019.11.08 2019가단114873

-대구지방법원서부지원 2020.05.26 2020가단81

-수원지방법원여주지원 2019.02.21 2018가단5036

-대구지방법원서부지원 2020.05.12 2019가단7765

-수원지방법원 2016.04.07 2015가단49459