logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.01.25 2016가단23689
건물명도 등
Text

1. The Defendants are to the Plaintiff:

(a)each point of Annex A, 2, 3, 4, and 1, among the real estate listed in the separate list;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 3, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants on the part (A) on the part of the real estate indicated in the order on the attached list, which is owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant store”) by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 5,00,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,000 (repaid on September 25, 2015), and September 23, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. Around that time, the Defendants occupied and used the instant store by delivery. From January 25, 2016 to October 24, 2016, the Defendants did not pay the rent of KRW 4,500,000 (=500,000 x 9 months) for the nine-month period from October 25, 2016 and the rent from October 25, 2016.

C. On October 10, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the intent to terminate the lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendants’ delinquency in rent.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated, the Defendants are obligated to deliver and return the instant store to the Plaintiff, and jointly pay the Plaintiff the overdue rent of KRW 4,500,000 and the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to KRW 500,000 per month from October 25, 2016 to the return date of the instant store.

B. The Defendants asserted to the effect that, as there was a prior agreement to pay the rent in the rent deposit as a way to deduct the monthly rent from the rent deposit, the Plaintiff cannot terminate the lease contract on the grounds of the Defendants’ delinquency in rent.

However, according to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and all pleadings, the defendants leased the store of this case as the so-called "sub-Section" (a lease made in lump sum or in installments for the lease period without a security deposit) prior to October 3, 2014. However, upon entering into the instant lease agreement on October 3, 2014, the defendants pay a security deposit in advance and pay a monthly rent.

arrow