(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.05.25 2017가단124998

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 안양지원 2018.05.25 2017가단124998

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant

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

(b) 1,508,260 Won and 1,466,590 among them;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As part of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport’s housing welfare project, the Plaintiff is running a business to support low-priced rental housing so that the lowest income class in the downtown can reside stably.

The Plaintiff shall enter into a lease agreement with a housing owner on a deposit basis with an applicant for assistance in the lease of a pre-existing house pursuant to the “Guidelines for the Business of Rental on Lease on a deposit basis of an existing house” and the “Management and Operation and Management Regulations of the National Housing Fund (amended by Housing and Urban Fund Act and Management Regulations)” and enter into a lease agreement with an occupant, and a lease deposit shall be paid to a housing owner part of the total lease deposit, and the remainder of the lease deposit shall be

B. On July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with B on the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On the same day, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 82 million from July 30, 2016 to July 29, 2018, and monthly rent of KRW 130,470 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. According to the instant lease agreement, where a lessee has not paid rent for at least three months, the Plaintiff may terminate the contract (Article 9 Subparag. 2). From November 30, 2016 to October 31, 2017, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff a total of KRW 1,466,590, the sum of rent or unjust enrichment, and late payment 41,670, and the overdue interest rate is 7% per annum.

The duplicate of the complaint of this case, on January 17, 2018, indicating the Plaintiff’s intent to terminate the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s default of rent, was served on the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination on the cause of the claim, the instant lease contract was terminated on January 17, 2018.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.10.25 2016가단211766

-수원지방법원안양지원 2017.06.02 2016가단109596

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.28 2016가단5132607

-전주지방법원 2017.09.15 2016나10509

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.07 2015가단5353032