(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.10.20 2015가단111699

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) 수원지방법원 2015.10.20 2015가단111699

건물명도

Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) ordered the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) to enter each real estate in the separate sheet, and from November 30, 2014.

Reasons

All principal lawsuit and counterclaims shall be deemed to have been filed

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 1, 2012, the Plaintiff (A, a stock company, was changed from D Co., Ltd.) leased the instant factory to E (the Plaintiff was responsible for the overall liability of Defendant Co., Ltd. established on June 21, 2013) with the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,000, monthly rent of KRW 200,000, and from October 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013 (where the instant factory becomes a sale during the lease period, within 30 days from the date of the lessor’s notice, the lessee entered into an agreement with the Defendant on the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,00,00,00, and again, on May 25, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the instant factory to the Defendant with the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,000,000,000,000 from May 30, 2013

The Plaintiff received additional payment of KRW 5,00,000 as the contract deposit from the Defendant, and the Defendant occupied the instant factory and used it until the date of closing argument.

B. From June 16, 2014 to the date of the closing of argument in the instant case, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that the instant lease contract was terminated by the instant lawsuit, as it was not paid the monthly rent of KRW 2,750,000 (including surtax).

Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts stated in the above 1. Paragraph (1) above, the lease of this case continues to exist after implied renewal after the expiration of the term of validity, and 1-B of the plaintiff.

Since the termination of the contract as described in paragraph (1) is deemed to have been terminated, the defendant is obligated to order the factory of this case to the plaintiff and pay the defendant the amount of money in proportion to KRW 2,750,000 each month from June 16, 2014 to the above order date.

I would like to say.

The defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's request for surrender until the deposit is returned.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2014.11.25 2014나1915

-수원지방법원 2016.01.19 2015가단138281

-수원지방법원 2016.04.05 2015가단117963

-서울서부지방법원 2015.04.15 2014가단243671

-수원지방법원 2015.06.30 2015가단9758