(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.04.14 2016나15324

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) 수원지방법원 2017.04.14 2016나15324

손해배상

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged in full view of the entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of all pleadings:

On December 26, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of 200,000 won, monthly rent of KRW 150,000,000, and the lease period from December 26, 2014 to December 26, 2015, respectively, with respect to the housing located in Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun (hereinafter “instant housing”).

B. On September 2015, the Plaintiff asked the Defendant whether to renew the instant lease agreement, but the Defendant rejected it, and on December 28, 2015, withdrawn from the instant house.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant did not contact with the Plaintiff whether to renew the instant lease agreement, and the Plaintiff did not enter into a lease agreement with a person who sought to rent the instant house for two years. Without any notification from the Defendant, the boiler was out of the instant house and suffered damage, such as the said boiler was removed from the said house.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total of KRW 3.6 million and KRW 7.3 million for the repair cost of boilers, etc. for the two years in which the above lease contract was not concluded.

B. The Plaintiff failed to enter into a new lease agreement for a lease period of two years due to the Defendant’s fault on the sole basis of the records of No. 2, A’s evidence, and A’s evidence No. 3.

It is insufficient to recognize the fact that the boiler of the instant house was 3.6 million won or the damage therefrom was caused by the Defendant’s fault, and that the boiler of the instant house was 5.3 million won due to the Defendant’s fault, and that the damage was 7.3 million won, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just and just.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2019.08.29 2018나11432

-서울서부지방법원 2019.05.16 2019가단202019

-서울동부지방법원 2018.04.25 2017가단12401

-청주지방법원 2016.01.27 2015가단110515

-서울동부지방법원 2018.01.24 2016가단121063