(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2016.10.18 2015가단16266

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) 대구지방법원서부지원 2016.10.18 2015가단16266

동산인도

Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the movable property listed in the attached list.

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

3...

Reasons

The Plaintiff entered into three lease agreements with the Defendant on the movables listed in the separate sheet as follows, and delivered the relevant movables to the Defendant around the date of each contract.

On January 22, 2015, FL15014000, KRW 100,000,00,01,010,000, 36 months, such as a computerized type analysis technician, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “FL14070210, Oct. 24, 2014, 36 months, 19,600,600, 360,667,503 FL14080808, 36 months, 179,9,009,9,005,000) were terminated on August 11, 2014, the Plaintiff breached the duty to immediately return the leased goods to the Plaintiff during the lease period prescribed in Article 36(4)19,60,00,00,005,516,789, and the Defendant breached the duty to immediately pay the leased goods to the Plaintiff during the lease period.

Around August 11, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the contract will be terminated without paying the overdue lease fee for each contract by August 11, 2015, and that the contract will be terminated without paying it by August 11, 2015. Around September 8, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the contract will be terminated without paying the overdue lease fee for each contract by September 14, 2015.

However, the defendant did not pay the overdue lease fee, and the plaintiff notified the defendant that the contract should be terminated on November 27, 2015.

[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul's evidence Nos. 3 and 4 (including the number of branches), and the purport of the whole pleadings, the above lease contract was lawfully terminated on the ground of the defendant's default of lease fees. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver to the plaintiff as the owner of the land with the property indicated in the separate sheet as the restoration to the original state upon termination.

The defendant's assertion is judged as to the defendant.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.11 2017가단5244910

-창원지방법원 2019.01.10 2018가합52047

-창원지방법원마산지원 2015.11.06 2015가단7414

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.18 2017가단34613

-수원지방법원안산지원 2017.09.26 2017가단51887