본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
대전지방법원 2015.08.28 2014나106210

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the claim for payment is to be changed as follows:

The defendant (1) 6,007. 1)


1. Basic facts

A. On October 28, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the real estate listed in the attached list owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”) with the terms that the Defendant will lease deposit KRW 10,000,000 per month, KRW 80,000 per month (in addition to value-added tax of KRW 80,000 on the 15th day of each month, payment in advance on the 15th day of each month), and the term of lease from December 15, 201 to December 15, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and the Defendant paid the above lease deposit to the Plaintiff and operated the Chinese Fishery Research Institute in the instant building.

B. Upon entering into the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to terminate the contract where the lessee bears public charges from the date of occupancy due to the special agreement, and the lessee returns them to the original state upon the expiration of the contract. On November 15, 2012, the deposit is increased by KRW 10 million, but the said increased deposit is not paid.

C. On April 28, 2014, the Plaintiff, the director of the Plaintiff, issued a summary order of KRW 1,00,000,000, on the grounds of the criminal fact that “C was guilty of the crime of interference with the operation of the instant building and ordered the manager of the instant building to block the electricity of the Chinese Language Institute operated by the said victim on the grounds that management expenses and monthly rent were unpaid on or around January 20, 2014.” The said summary order became final and conclusive around that time.

On January 21, 2014, the manager of the instant building cut off the electricity of the instant building according to C’s instruction, and again supplied electricity from July 8, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 7-1, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The lease contract for the instant building between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated on December 15, 2013, and even if it was not terminated at the said time.

The defendant is also the defendant.