logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원공주지원 2016.07.06 2015가합20106
건물인도 등
Text

1. Defendant B:

A. Attached Form to the plaintiffs

1. Attached Form among the first floor of the building to be entered;

2. Each point of the indication of drawings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 1.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 25, 2012, the Defendants concluded a lease agreement with the Korea Savings Bank and the Yong-Nam Savings Bank (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) setting the lease deposit of KRW 100,000,000 (including value-added tax), the rent of KRW 11,00,000 (including value-added tax), and the lease period as of January 24, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. On April 30, 2013, the bankruptcy of the Korea Savings Bank and the Yong-Nam Savings Bank and the Korea Savings Bank appointed a trustee in bankruptcy were declared bankrupt on April 30, 2013 by the Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap47, and Yong-Nam Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on September 26, 2013 by the Busan District Court 2013Hahap16, each Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy

C. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants’ agreed parties did not pay that the Defendants were the teas under the instant lease agreement. For this reason, on August 21, 2014, the Defendants notified the termination of the instant lease agreement to the Defendants. On February 9, 2015, the Defendants filed the instant lawsuit seeking the payment of unjust enrichment equivalent to the instant rent by the date of completion of delivery of the instant database and the instant lawsuit seeking the delivery of the unpaid rent.

After the filing of the instant lawsuit on July 20, 2015, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants: (a) within three months from the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Defendants collected the database from the Plaintiffs and deliver the instant database; and (b) the Defendants agreed to pay the Plaintiffs KRW 72,500,000 each within three months from the unpaid rent by February 28, 2015 (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

On the other hand, Defendant A paid KRW 72,50,000 to the Plaintiffs within the period specified in the instant agreement.

Although there was a house used by the Defendants, the Plaintiffs, at least after the agreement of this case, control the entry of the Defendants in the form of locking device at least after the agreement of this case.

Defendant A does not engage in business in the instant database.

[Reasons for Recognition]

arrow