logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원여주지원 2017.12.21 2017가단54178
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

A. Of the 1st floor of the building indicated in the attached list, the section 46 square meters per page of the attached list shall be indicated.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 4, 2016, the Plaintiffs shared 1/2 shares of the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) and concluded a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 550,000 ( KRW 450,000 and KRW 100,000 per month of the instant store), from July 20, 2016 to July 20, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

Article 4 of the above lease contract states that "The lessor may immediately terminate this contract when the lessee has failed to pay the rent more than twice consecutively, or the lessor has violated Article 3."

B. However, although the Defendant was using the instant store upon delivery, it was only paid to the Plaintiffs KRW 3 million as the leased deposit and KRW 8.5 million as the monthly rent, and did not pay the remainder of the leased deposit KRW 2 million as well as the monthly rent after September 2017.

C. On December 5, 2016, the Defendant demanded the payment of monthly rent, etc. from the Plaintiffs, the Defendant drafted a letter of commitment performance that “The Plaintiff shall pay the unpaid deposit of KRW 2 million and the overdue rent of KRW 2 million up to January 31, 2017, on condition that it shall not comply with it until March 31, 2017 (up to February 31, 2017) where the said store is not implemented (up to February 31, 2017).”

However, the defendant did not comply with the above commitment performance letter.

Accordingly, the Plaintiffs expressed to the Defendant that the instant lease contract will be terminated on the ground of rent delay by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint on the Defendant.

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the lease contract of this case was lawfully terminated by the plaintiffs' declaration of termination on the grounds of the defendant's delay of rent.

arrow