(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.09.02 2016가단3263

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) 의정부지방법원 2016.09.02 2016가단3263

건물명도 등

Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. August 8, 2016

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 6, 11, 12 to 16:

On March 3, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant stating that the lease term between April 8, 2015 and April 8, 2017, the lease deposit is KRW 30 million for the lease deposit, and the monthly rent is KRW 950,000 for the real estate indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “lease object”).

B. On April 8, 2015, the Plaintiff delivered the instant leased object to the Defendant, and the Defendant paid KRW 25 million out of the instant lease deposit to the Plaintiff on the same day.

C. The Defendant paid KRW 5 million out of KRW 30 million to May 8, 2015, but did not pay the lease deposit.

However, in the object of the lease of this case, in order to put the location of this case into the site and individually turn out, the location of the room, main room, tweet, tweet, and 4 location was integrated into one place (hereinafter “the location of this case”), and the location of the room, main room, tweet, and wall 4 location was integrated into one place.

E. (1) The plaintiff and the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff as Seoul East Eastern District Court 2015Gahap2438, and the above court rendered a judgment on December 18, 2015, stating that "(1) water is found in the lake house house located on the main bank of the leased object of this case and it is difficult to deem the head of this case to the extent that the use of the leased object of this case does not interfere with the use of the leased object of this case." (2) The plaintiff accepted the house house house house located on the main bank of the leased object of this case and dismissed the defendant's remaining claims."

(2) The defendant.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.04.29 2016나2699

-서울동부지방법원 2015.12.18 2015가합2438

-대구지방법원안동지원 2015.11.30 2014가단3511

-수원지방법원 2019.04.19 2018나79407

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.11.22 2016가합72191 (1)