(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.14 2013나62635

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.14 2013나62635

위약금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) is the owner of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Emerat Price 110.

Defendant C is the wife of Defendant B’s representative director F, and E is the owner of No. 109 (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant stores,” in total of No. 109 and 110).

B. On November 9, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant C to lease each of the instant stores at KRW 50,000,000 each of the lease deposit and monthly rent of KRW 3,50,000 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant lease agreements”).

At the time, the Defendants filed a lawsuit against the former lessee regarding each of the instant stores, and thus, each of the lease deposits shall be paid after the filing of the lawsuit for requesting extradition is completed, and the lease period and the commencement date were not specified.

C. The Plaintiff paid 5,000,000 won each as down payment to the Defendants on the same day.

F, on January 23, 2013, with the qualification of Defendant C’s agent and B representative director, proposed that he will rent to G et al., to be the store located in each of the instant stores on a better condition from the large enterprise, but instead, the term of each of the instant lease agreements with the Plaintiff was one year, and thereafter, it was proposed that the lease deposit was raised to KRW 100,000,000 each, and the monthly rent was raised to KRW 4,00,000.

E. F: (a) around January 24, 2013, the Plaintiff met the Plaintiff; (b) on the down payment received on the 28th of the same month, the Plaintiff told that each of the instant lease agreements should be cancelled, as it would return the penalty of KRW 5,00,000,000, respectively; and (c) the Plaintiff consented thereto.

F. F said that the Plaintiff, who received the down payment and penalty on January 28, 2013, caused the down payment and penalty, cannot pay the penalty and only return the down payment.

The plaintiff and the F are controversial.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Evidence A No. 1-2, A.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2017.01.10 2015가단27551

-대전지방법원 2015.05.15 2014나18146

-전주지방법원 2017.04.26 2015가단14879

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.18 2015가단172405

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.25 2017가합509466