logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원해남지원 2016.10.11 2015가단20398
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,868,00 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from November 3, 2014 to October 11, 2016.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the 3rd floor building on the ground of Jeonnam-do, Jeonnam-do (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On February 2, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the second floor of the instant building (hereinafter “instant leased”) to the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 5 million, monthly rent of KRW 400,000,000, and the lease term from February 24, 2013 to February 25, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). C.

From March 7, 2013, the Defendant has operated an entertainment drinking house with the trade name “D” from the leased part of the instant case.

On November 3, 2014, a fire occurred in the leased section of this case on November 3, 2014, and the third floor of the instant building became fire.

(hereinafter “instant fire”). E.

The leased part of this case and the third floor of the building of this case were destroyed by the fire of this case and the window-hosing, internal partitions, scams, scams, remote areas, etc., so they cannot be used.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, appraiser E's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) The occurrence of liability for damages occurs when a lessor cannot allow the lessee to use or make profits from the leased object because the leased object was entirely destroyed or damaged, and there are no special circumstances to deem that such nonperformance is temporary, the lease agreement shall be deemed to have been naturally terminated without the need to wait for the party’s declaration of termination. As seen earlier, the lease agreement in this case was terminated due to the fire in this case, which was destroyed on November 3, 2014. Accordingly, it was impossible for the lessee to return the leased object to the Plaintiff, who is the lessor, at the time of lease. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable for compensation for the damages suffered by the Plaintiff (2).

arrow