(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.18 2019가단36934

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.18 2019가단36934

손해배상(기) 청구의 소

Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is entitled to KRW 5,00,000,000 against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from November 20, 2019 to February 18, 2020.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The parties concerned are co-owners possessing 1/2 shares of the land and the building listed in the [Attachment 1] No. 1 and No. 2 (hereinafter “instant land and building”). The Plaintiff was the occupant of the first floor of the instant building (hereinafter “instant store”).

B. The following lease contract was drawn up between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

1) On May 22, 2007, 200/Deposit 20,000,000 / Monthly rent 800,000 won (hereinafter “(1)”) shall be the lessor’s Defendant, lessee, Plaintiff / contract date.

(2) Although the lessor’s Defendant, C, Plaintiff / Lessee’s date of the contract stated that deposit KRW 25,00,000,000 is paid and received at the time of the contract amount of KRW 20,000,00, the date of June 25, 2007; however, there is no seal affixed after the contract amount of KRW 20,000 (payment on May 28, 2007) / Defendant lessor, Plaintiff / lessee, and Plaintiff / Contract date of January 28, 2008 (hereinafter “B lease agreement”) / the proviso of the proviso of the Article 3(1) of the Agreement that the contract was concluded on May 28, 2007 and the new agreement was null and void.

A person shall be appointed.

C. The Plaintiff’s criminal complaint and disposition result 1) The Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant on the grounds that the Defendant forged the lease agreement, but the Defendant was subject to a disposition that the Defendant was unsuspected (Seoul High Court Decision 2017No. 68417, Nov. 24, 2017; Supreme Court Order 2017No. 68417, Nov. 24, 2017). The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication, but the court dismissed the said application on April 23, 2018 (Seoul High Court Decision 2018No. 216, Apr. 23, 2018). However, the Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint against the Defendant that obstructed the Plaintiff’s operation of the D restaurant, but the Defendant was subject to a disposition that was not suspected of mis

(U.S. Supreme Court Order 2018No. 27016 dated April 26, 2018). 3 Plaintiff is the Defendant.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.18 2019가단36934

-수원지방법원 2018.01.18 2017가단508723

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2014.08.27 2012가단501557

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.09.07 2016가단74909

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2018.02.14 2016가단5111