(영문) 대전지방법원 홍성지원 2018.05.23 2017가단1455

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) 대전지방법원 홍성지원 2018.05.23 2017가단1455

임대차보증금

Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the main claim are all dismissed.

2...

Reasons

1. Summary: The subject of judgment and the order of judgment in this case can be divided into ① the Plaintiff’s main claim against the Defendant B, ② the Plaintiff’s main claim against the Defendant Company, ③ the Defendant’s counterclaim against the Plaintiff.

Among them, the plaintiff's main claim against the defendant B and the counterclaim against the plaintiff by the defendant B are common issues. Thus, under the following circumstances, the legitimacy of the argument should be examined in the order of ①, ③, and ② for the convenience of discussion.

2. The plaintiff's judgment on the plaintiff's main claim against defendant B

A. Basic facts 1) On November 2013, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the instant building from Defendant B to Defendant B for the purpose of a warehouse and office with a lease deposit of KRW 10 million and KRW 800,000 per month (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

(2) Around that time, the Plaintiff and the Defendant paid KRW 10 million to Defendant B. In relation to the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not separately set the term of lease. (2) On September 21, 2016, the Plaintiff sent content-certified mail, including the intent to request the return of the lease deposit, and the content-certified mail reached Defendant B around that time.

3) From November 2013 to September 8, 2017, the Plaintiff maintained a theft prevention device of security enterprises installed in and out of the instant building with equipment installed in and out of the instant building, and controlled others’ access to the instant building on a intermittent basis. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff entered the instant building on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff did not dispute; (b) the entry in the evidence Nos. 3, 6, 11, and Nos. 1 through 4 (including serial numbers); and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.

B. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The key point of the Plaintiff’s claim is D (the terms and conditions of the contract between the Plaintiff’s son and son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.09.22 2016나12875

-의정부지방법원 2016.09.23 2016가단102450

-대전지방법원 2020.01.22 2018나107075

-서울북부지방법원 2018.01.18 2017가단18160

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.13 2015가단211454