logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.07.13 2016가단143230
건물인도 및 퇴거
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Attached List;

1.The listed real estate,

(b) Attached List;

2. Attached drawing of the stated real estate;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 30, 2014, the Plaintiff’s Schedule to the Defendant and the Plaintiff’s owner.

1. The stated real estate and the attached list;

2. A list of the registered real estate (attached drawing 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, and 224.07 square meters in succession with each point of each of the items described in Annex A and Annex A;

3. A list of the registered real estate (attached drawings, e.g., 5,6, 7, 8, 5, and 1,841.4 square meters in a glass temperature room, which connects each point of the e.g., the list;

4. 기재 부동산(별지도면 표시 ㅈ, ㅊ, ㅋ, ㅌ, ㅈ의 각 점을 순차 연결한 선내 (다)부분 비닐온실 72㎡)(이하 위 부동산들을 통칭하여 ‘이 사건 부동산’이라 한다)을 임대보증금 80,000,000원, 차임 3,000,000원, 기간 2014. 7. 30.부터 2016. 7. 29.로 정하여 임대하였다

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Defendant acquired the instant real estate from the Plaintiff on July 30, 2014, and thereafter possessed and used the instant real estate from that time to that time.

C. On May 27, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the refusal to renew the instant lease agreement.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Gap evidence 5 and 6 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the above findings of the determination on the cause of the claim, since the lease contract of this case was terminated upon the expiration of the period, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff.

B. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff did not report the above glass greenhouse, which is the object of lease, to the competent authority, and that the defendant suffered losses from not utilizing the above glass greenhouse, and that the defendant paid a large amount of expenses for the business to proceed in the real estate of this case.

In this case, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant's failure to properly utilize the above free temperature room was attributable to the plaintiff's causes attributable to the plaintiff's side.

arrow