(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.10.10 2014나800 | 리걸엔진

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) 대전지방법원 2014.10.10 2014나800

임대료

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person operating a household building materials leasing business under the trade name of “B,” and the Defendant is a company with the purpose of mechanical equipment construction business, etc.

B. As of March 20, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant: (a) on the basis of the volume and items determined by the Defendant and requested the Plaintiff to lease the building-to-rent materials; (b) the Plaintiff agreed to lease them to the Defendant; and (c) drafted a “permanent lease agreement” with the Defendant to pay monthly rent to

(hereinafter referred to as "the lease agreement of this case"). [Grounds for recognition] The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid rent of KRW 10,603,971 and the delay damages therefrom, on the ground that the Defendant, upon the Plaintiff’s request for the lease of construction materials, leased the construction materials to the Defendant from March 30, 2012 to October 31, 2012.

B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The instant lease agreement is not concluded for the small-scale mechanical works or raw material works, but is made up for the Defendant’s construction works in Incheon. 2) The Defendant awarded a subcontract to another person without directly performing the small-scale mechanical works, and thus, it did not have leased the materials necessary for the said construction from the Plaintiff.

The raw material machine works are non-related construction works with the defendant.

3. The following circumstances may be acknowledged in light of the evidence Nos. 1, 2-1 to 4, 1, 2-2, 3-1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13, and 14-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

① The Plaintiff’s construction work performed by the Defendant from May 22, 2012 to June 30, 2012.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2014.09.17 2014가합2262

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.29 2015가단127993

-수원지방법원 여주지원 2018.10.02 2018가단3733

-창원지방법원진주지원 2015.05.22 2013가단1507

-대전지방법원천안지원 2017.10.26 2017가단5750