(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.04.28 2014가단65339

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) 서울남부지방법원 2015.04.28 2014가단65339

건물인도 등

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. As from March 18, 2015, KRW 4,710,00 and the above.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 10, 2014, the Plaintiff leased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant, with the lease deposit of KRW 25 million, monthly rent of KRW 2700,000 (excluding value-added tax and overdue interest rate of KRW 15% per annum), and the lease period of KRW 1,50,000 from January 17, 2014.

(Monthly Rent shall be paid in the late payment on the 22th day of each month; hereinafter referred to as "the instant lease agreement"). (b)

The Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate, but did not pay the Plaintiff the monthly rent on June 2014, and did not pay the monthly rent until the time of the closing of the instant argument.

B. The Plaintiff expressed his intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds that the instant complaint was unpaid, and on December 8, 2014, the Plaintiff sent his/her intent to the Defendant.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On December 8, 2014, upon receipt of the Plaintiff’s notice of termination on the ground that the instant lease contract had been lawfully terminated and terminated on or before December 8, 2014, and on March 17, 2015, the amount calculated by deducting deposit KRW 25 million from the aggregate of the unpaid monthly rent or unjust enrichment equivalent to the monthly rent from March 17, 2015 is not a dispute between the parties. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and, as sought by the Plaintiff, pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the amount of unjust enrichment calculated on or after March 18, 2015 from March 18, 2015 to the completion of delivery of the instant real estate.

3. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2018.01.26 2017가단249985

-대전지방법원서산지원 2014.12.11 2014가합313

-서울남부지방법원 2015.04.07 2014가단55523

-의정부지방법원 2015.06.19 2015가합264

-서울동부지방법원 2016.02.05 2015가단44459