(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.04.25 2016가단62084

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) 부산지방법원 2017.04.25 2016가단62084

건물명도

Text

1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver the buildings listed in the separate sheet;

(b) KRW 3,150,000 and as regards it,

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 6, 2016, the Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit basis of KRW 20,000,000 for lease deposit, KRW 1,000,00 for the rent, and KRW 1,00,000 for the rent period from June 4, 2016, and KRW 15,000 for the lease deposit. The Defendant paid KRW 15,00,000 for the lease deposit, and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 1,050,00 for the rent as KRW 1,00 for each month, but the Defendant paid KRW 5,00,000 for the lease deposit additionally on September 16, 2016.

B. The Defendant did not pay the tea since August 2016 when it was transferred to and used in the instant building.

3,150,000 won (=1,050,000 x 3 months) is the unpaid vehicle as of November 3, 2016.

C. On November 16, 2016, the instant complaint to the effect that the Plaintiffs terminated the lease agreement on the grounds of the delinquency in rent was served on the Defendant.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, since the lease contract for the building of this case between the plaintiffs and the defendant was lawfully terminated by the plaintiffs' notice of termination due to the delay in rent, the defendant delivered the building of this case to the plaintiffs as restitution, and as requested by the plaintiffs, the unpaid rent 3,150,000 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from November 17, 2016 to the day of complete payment from the day of delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment. The plaintiffs are obligated to pay the rent of this case to the 1,050,000 won per annum from November 5, 2016 to the day of delivery of the building of this case as claimed by the plaintiffs.

The defendant asserts that even if the overdue rent is deducted, the deposit still remains, so it is impossible to comply with the plaintiffs' claim until the expiration of the lease term. However, the defendant's argument is the reason for the above argument.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2017.02.10 2016가단19568

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.05.17 2016가단24788

-광주지방법원목포지원 2017.10.11 2017가단3343

-인천지방법원 2017.04.25 2016가단50329

-부산지방법원 2016.11.15 2016가단27326