logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.04.05 2015가단19027
건물인도
Text

1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 15, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B, with the terms that the said Defendant shall lease deposit amounting to KRW 100,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 7,000,000, and June 2, 2014 from June 1, 2014 to June 1, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The Plaintiff leased the instant building to Defendant B pursuant to the instant lease, and Defendant C, the father of Defendant B, operated the instant real estate as leisure houses.

C. Meanwhile, Article 10(1) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (hereinafter “Act”) provides that a lessor shall not refuse a request for renewal of a contract between six months and one month before the expiration of the lease term without justifiable grounds. In cases where a lessor fails to notify the lessee of the refusal to renew the contract or to notify the lessee of the change of the terms and conditions within the said period, the lessor shall be deemed to have renewed the lease under the same conditions as the lease at the expiration of the lease term.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence No. 1, witness D's testimony and whole purport of pleading

2. In light of the above facts, unless there are special circumstances, the lease of this case has expired due to the expiration of the term of validity. Thus, the defendants are obliged to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff.

The Defendants asserted that the lease of this case was renewed first, but it is difficult to view that the testimony of the witness D alone requested the Plaintiff to renew the lease of this case at least six months or one month before the expiration of the lease term as prescribed by the law, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, if the purport of the entire argument is added to the statement in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the Plaintiff’s assertion to Defendant B on April 27, 2015.

arrow