logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.11.30 2018가단8140
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B delivers a building listed in the separate sheet, and from February 21, 2018, the said building.

Reasons

1. On April 20, 2016, the Plaintiff expressed to Defendant B the intention of termination of the lease agreement on the ground of the expiration of the lease term on February 26, 2018, and on April 21, 2016, the following facts: (a) from April 21, 2016 to April 21, 2017, lease deposit amounting to KRW 25 million; (b) lease deposit amounting to KRW 170,000,000,000,000 in monthly rent; (c) the Plaintiff expressed to the Plaintiff the intention of termination of the lease agreement on the ground that the lease term expires; and (d) Defendant B did not pay to the Plaintiff the rent from February 21, 2018 to April 21, 2017; and (d) Defendant C did not pay to the Plaintiff that the building was previously resided from Defendant B without the Plaintiff’s consent, and thus, Defendant C did not have any dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B1 through 4, as a entire pleading between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff.

According to the above facts and the above evidence, the lease contract of this case was renewed on April 21, 2017, which is the expiration date of the original lease term, and its renewed lease term was two years pursuant to Article 6(2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act. Since it is recognized that the contract of this case was lawfully terminated by the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, which contains the plaintiff's declaration of termination of the lease on the ground of not less than two years of delinquency in rent, etc. against the defendant B, the defendant B is obligated to deliver the building of this case, deliver the building of this case from February 21, 2018 to the day the delivery is completed, and the defendant C is obligated to leave the building of this case.

2. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all.

arrow