logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2018.12.14 2018가단32858
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The defendant is among the buildings listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.

paragraphs 1 and 2.

To deliver each part of the entry in the subsection.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 28, 2017, the Plaintiff is among the buildings listed in the separate sheet to the Defendant.

The part mentioned in paragraph (1) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant bath”) was leased KRW 70,00,000 for lease deposit, KRW 4,000 for rent month, KRW 4,000 for value-added tax (excluding value-added tax), and the term of lease from March 1, 2017 to February 28, 2019.

(hereinafter “instant first lease contract”). (b)

On April 14, 2017, the Plaintiff was among the buildings listed in the attached list to the Defendant.

The part mentioned in the port (hereinafter referred to as “instant house”) was leased KRW 10,00,00, monthly rent of KRW 400,000, and the term of lease from April 14, 2017 to April 13, 2019.

(hereinafter “instant second lease contract”). C.

1) The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 4,40,00,00 on March 3, 2017 under the instant lease contract, KRW 4,400,00 on April 3, 2017, KRW 4,400,00 on April 3, 2017, KRW 5,800 on September 1, 2017, KRW 8,800,000 on September 1, 2017, KRW 4,400,00 on November 14, 2017, KRW 00,00 on KRW 0,40,00 on January 8, 208, KRW 00 on KRW 14,40,00 on February 14, 208, KRW 00 on KRW 40,00 on April 4, 208, KRW 2008; and KRW 8,400 on April 4, 2008.

(2) The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 22,00,000,000, totaling KRW 222,000,000 on March 10, 2018, and KRW 27,000 on April 17, 2018, as the rent under the instant second lease contract.

(Then, the defendant additionally paid KRW 200,000 to the defendant on May 8, 2018). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant did not pay the rent for at least three years under each of the instant lease agreements. On this ground, the fact that the copy of the complaint of this case, on April 30, 2018, stating the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate each of the above lease agreements, was clearly recorded, and thus, each of the above lease agreements is around that time.

arrow