logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.06.17 2014가단39090
건물인도
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 is indicated in the attached Form 2 attached hereto.

Reasons

1. On July 1, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) determined that the Plaintiff shall pay in advance the Defendant a deposit of KRW 12,00,00,00 for the portion (A) part (hereinafter “factory building”) connected with each of the items in the separate sheet No. 1,2,3,4, and 1; (b) during the period from July 26, 2014 to July 25, 2016; (c) determined that the rent shall be paid in advance from August 10, 2014; (d) the Defendant did not successively connected the Plaintiff’s land No. 5,6,2,1, and5 with each of the items in the separate sheet No. 1,200,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,200,000 for each of the items (A); or (e) the Defendant’s declaration of intention to pay in sequence to the Plaintiff on the grounds that each of the aforementioned items was not related to the Plaintiff’s land No. 2, 1,279,741,2,7,7, and 1,27. 1,27.

According to the above facts, the above lease contract was terminated by the plaintiff's content certification to the effect that the above lease contract is terminated on the ground of the defendant's delay, and the defendant installed the above tent and container on the ground B in Gwangju-si, thereby hindering the exercise of the plaintiff's ownership in the above land.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver to the Plaintiff the factory building, which is the leased object, and pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated by the ratio of KRW 1,200,000 per month from September 10, 2014 to the completion date of delivery of the above factory building from September 10, 2014 to unjust enrichment equivalent to unpaid rent or rent, and to remove the above tent and container respectively.

2. The defendant's assertion and judgment have failed to use and benefit from the leased object due to the delay in the procedure for permitting the permission of the drainage facility for the leased object, and thus, the plaintiff's claim.

arrow