logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2019.07.03 2018가단21111
건물명도
Text

1. The defendant

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

B. From October 14, 2018, KRW 4,246,00 and KRW 4,246,00.

Reasons

If evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 4 added the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff leased on October 12, 2016 the building attached to the Defendant (Yansan-si C and D) as a security deposit of 2 million won, 2.80,000 won per month (the separate payment of KRW 1,000 on the 15th day of each month), and the period from October 14, 2016 to 2 years from October 14, 2016. The Defendant paid a security deposit to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is residing in the attached building, and the unpaid rent and water fee of 4,246,00,00, and the Plaintiff must pay on May 14, 2018 to the Defendant the unpaid vehicle by May 31, 2018.

6.1. He will terminate the above lease contract at his own expense.

‘The fact that a notice is sent by content-certified mail' can be recognized.

In addition to the above content certification, the Plaintiff again expressed his/her intention to terminate the above lease agreement on the ground of the delinquency in rent through the instant complaint, so the above lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was lawfully terminated.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the building indicated in the attached Form to the Plaintiff, and return the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated by the ratio of KRW 280,000 per month from October 14, 2018 to the delivery of the building. (No evidence exists to deem that the Defendant currently uses the water).

Although the defendant asserts that he did not delay the rent until December 31, 2017, and that he was partially paid the rent on October 31, 2018, there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's assertion.

In addition, the defendant argues that the contract extension agreement was made, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and claims that the lease was implicitly renewed, but the plaintiff sent a certificate of content that the contract would be terminated five months prior to the expiration of the lease term shall be deemed to have expressed his/her intention to refuse the renewal.

After the delivery of a copy of the complaint to Ansan-gu E, Ansan-gu, whose domicile is the resident registration, the defendant submitted a written answer.

arrow