(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.10 2017나28749

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 2017.11.10 2017나28749

임대차보증금반환 등

Text

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

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where part of the judgment of the court of first instance is written or added as follows, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. The three pages 12 to 17 of the first instance judgment shall have been written or added as follows.

D. On January 7, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail to the effect that “The Defendant breached his/her duty as a lessor who shall maintain the conditions necessary for the Plaintiff to use and benefit from the leased object during the term of the lease contract, and that the instant lease contract was terminated unfairly because it was difficult for the Plaintiff to operate the instant store by notifying the Plaintiff that the lease contract was terminated unfairly even if the rent did not reach three terms,” and that the said content-certified mail reached the Defendant around that time (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s termination”).

(iii) 20 pages 3, 20, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,

The following contents shall be added between 13 and 14 of the decision of the first instance.

“C) Even if the Defendant’s nonperformance of his/her own obligation does not reach the extent of termination of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff’s assertion on the existence of the instant lease agreement even after leaving the instant store constitutes a violation of the good faith principle. As such, the Defendant is obligated to withdraw the Plaintiff from the Plaintiff and refund the remaining lease deposit calculated as above as of January 8, 2016.

The 5th and 9th of the judgment of the first instance court shall be changed to the 8th and 9th of the 16th of the judgment.

Part 8 of the 8th judgment of the first instance court shall be referred to as "this court" in the first instance court.

Part 1 to 2 of the judgment of the first instance court is "in fact inquiry".

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.27 2017나20974

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.08 2016나69118

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.12 2017나20479

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.27 2017나39299

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.13 2017나14955