logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.06.29 2015가단16071
건물명도
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B: (a) the buildings listed in paragraph 1 of the attached list;

B. Defendant C shall set out in attached list 2.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 13, 1989, the Plaintiff owned the said house until now after acquiring the ownership of the house listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant house”).

B. On October 28, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the Plaintiff and D with regard to the part of the first and second floors of the instant housing as to the lease deposit of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 250,000, November 28, 2008 and November 27, 2010, respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as “the first lease contract”). C.

As of the date of the closing of argument in possession of the Defendants’ housing, Defendant C occupies the second floor of the instant housing, and Defendant B occupies the first floor of the instant housing.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 5-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, Defendant C has a duty to deliver the above occupied portion to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant house, unless there exist special circumstances.

3. Determination as to the defendants' defense

A. The defendants' defense 1) The summary of the defense of the right of lease 1 had concluded a lease agreement between the plaintiff and the network D, for which the right of representation to conclude a lease agreement was granted with respect to the housing of this case. Thus, the defendants asserted that the plaintiff had the right to legally possess each of the above parts of the housing of this case as the lessee. 2) The plaintiff's evidence Nos. 1 (a letter of delegation) cannot be used as evidence because there is no evidence to prove the authenticity, and according to the evidence Nos. 2 through 8, No. 10, No. 11, No. 11, and No. 13, the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and the plaintiff consented to the sub-lease of the housing of this case.

arrow