logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.11.24 2015가단37745
건물인도 등
Text

1. Defendant B shall deliver to the Plaintiff the building indicated in the indication of the attached building.

2. Defendant C:

(a) annex.

Reasons

1. The following facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2:

On January 19, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with Defendant B, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,320,000 (including value-added tax) and the lease term from January 19, 2015 to January 19, 2017, with respect to the building indicated in the indication of the attached building owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”).

(1) KRW 10,00,000 paid as down payment shall be replaced by monthly rent, etc. until May 31, 2015, and KRW 20,000,000 shall be paid within June 2015, but the said lease contract shall be deemed terminated if it is not performed.

(2) A lessee may be changed due to the circumstances described in Defendant B, and the Plaintiff, a lessor, shall cooperate with the Plaintiff.

B. After concluding a lease agreement as above, Defendant C occupies and uses the instant building until now.

C. Within June 2015, the Plaintiff was not paid KRW 20,000,000 as the deposit for lease.

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, as the Plaintiff did not receive KRW 20,00,000 from June 2015, the above lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was lawfully terminated. As such, Defendant B is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff as a lessee. Defendant C as a direct occupant, and the Plaintiff is obligated to withdraw from the instant building and pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 1,320,000 per month, an amount equivalent to the monthly rent from June 1, 2015 to the date of the completion of the withdrawal.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow