(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.11.22 2017가단20854

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) 전주지방법원 2017.11.22 2017가단20854

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant

A. From 10,00,000 won to 10,000 won, real estate listed in the separate sheet from July 1, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the terms that the instant real estate was leased with a period of two years from April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2016, including a lease deposit of KRW 10 million, KRW 80,000 per month (payment on January 1), and the lease period of the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. The Plaintiff received KRW 10 million from the Defendant and delivered the instant real estate to the Defendant.

C. From April 1, 2014 to July 4, 2017, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff a total of KRW 31.2 million (i.e., KRW 80,000 per month x 39 months).

On the first day for pleading of the instant case, the Plaintiff expressed his intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in paying two or more rents.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6 evidence, Gap evidence 8-1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease was terminated on November 8, 2017 (the first date for pleading of this case) and terminated.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and barring any special circumstance, from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2017 (the Defendant paid the difference of 39 months from April 1, 2014 to June 30, 2017) the following day of the period for which the Plaintiff was paid the rent (the unjust enrichment from the use of and benefit from real estate is deemed the rent of real estate) the Defendant is obligated to pay the rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 800,00 per month (the unjust enrichment from the use of and benefit from real estate is deemed the rent

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant has the duty to return the plaintiff's lease deposit and the duty to deliver the defendant's real estate simultaneously. Thus, the defendant cannot deliver the real estate of this case from the plaintiff until the return is made.

When the lease is terminated, the lease deposit of the lessor.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 안동지원 2018.11.30 2018가단1575

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.08.22 2017가단9703

-대구지방법원안동지원 2017.09.20 2017가단544

-인천지방법원 2020.11.05 2020가단5395

-수원지방법원 2018.06.21 2017가단542464