logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원포항지원 2013.11.29 2013가합40020
공사대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On October 31, 2010, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter the instant lease agreement) with the Plaintiff on the second floor (hereinafter the instant store) among the land buildings located in the north-gu Office in the Posi-si, Posi (hereinafter referred to as “instant store”) with the term of lease from October 31, 2010 to October 30, 2013, the lease deposit amount of KRW 10 million, the rent of KRW 1560,000 (including the water rate of KRW 60,000,000,000 won, and the payment of KRW 30,000,000 per month).

Around March 31, 2012, when the period of the instant lease agreement was in existence, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with D with regard to the instant store, setting the lease term from March 31, 2012 to March 30, 2014, with a deposit of KRW 10 million and KRW 1.5 million (payment on March 30, 201), and entered into the said lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). At the time, the Plaintiff participated as a member and signed on the said lease agreement.

On April 30, 2012, when the period of the instant lease agreement was in existence, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with E with regard to the instant store by setting the lease term from April 30, 2012 to April 29, 2014, the lease deposit of KRW 10 million, the rent of KRW 1.5 million (payment on April 30, 201), and the rent of KRW 1.5 million (payment on April 30, 201), and at the time D participated as a observer.

On September 12, 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 16.5 million after deducting 3.5 million, such as unpaid rents, etc., to E when he/she transferred the instant store on September 12, 2012, and received the instant store from E.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 5-1, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, 3-9, witness D, and F's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. (1) The Plaintiff, as the lessee of the instant lease agreement, sub-leaseed the instant store to D and E in sequence, and concluded the instant 2 and 3 lease agreement with the Defendant for convenience to change the business operator’s name on the instant store, etc.

arrow