logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.12.04 2018가단9842
건물명도 등
Text

1. From March 29, 2018 to March 201, 200, the Defendant from the Plaintiff to the date of completion of life expectancy C and 201 of Daejeon Daejeon-gu.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 29, 2014, the Defendant leased the instant house from the Plaintiff for a fixed period of 3 million won, 200,000 won for monthly rent, and 24 months from November 29, 2014, and around that time, paid 3 million won for the lease deposit to the Plaintiff and continued to reside until now with the order of the said house.

B. However, the Defendant paid the monthly rent for February 2018 on March 5, 2018, and continued to delay the monthly rent from March 2018.

C. On May 30, 2018, the Plaintiff’s letter of guarantee (a written application for modification of purport of claim and cause of claim) was served on May 25, 2018, which included the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to terminate the said lease due to delinquency in monthly rent to the Defendant, and thereby, the said lease contract was terminated.

[Reasons for Recognition] Clear fact in records, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to order the Plaintiff to use the instant house and pay unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of 200,000 won, which is equivalent to the monthly rent, from March 29, 2018 to the completion date of the life expectancy of the instant house.

On the other hand, the defendant paid monthly rent until March 2018, and asserts that the plaintiff's request for housing name cannot be complied with before being paid three million won of lease deposit.

The defendant paid 200,000 won to the plaintiff on March 5, 2018, but this is as seen earlier that the defendant appropriated the monthly rent for February 2018, which was overdue by the defendant. Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

As seen earlier, the Defendant paid three million won to the Plaintiff the lease deposit. Since the lessee’s obligation to specify the leased object following the termination of the lease contract and the duty to return the lease deposit to the lessor is in a simultaneous performance relationship, the Defendant is KRW 200,000 won per month from March 29, 2018 to the completion date of the name of the instant house from March 29, 2018.

arrow