(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.04.03 2018가단544108

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 2019.04.03 2018가단544108

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the annex;

(b) from November 13, 2018, real estate listed in the annexed Form.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 1, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant to lease the real estate owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and determined the lease term as 12 months from June 13, 2017 to June 12, 2018, the lease deposit amount of KRW 10 million, and the rent of KRW 100,000 per month (on June 13, 2017).

In addition, the Plaintiff handed over the instant real estate to the Defendant on June 13, 2017.

B. From August 13, 2017, the Defendant began to delay the Plaintiff’s rent. Since then, the Defendant paid a simplified overdue rent to the Plaintiff, but was in arrears by 7 months until June 12, 2018.

C. On June 11, 2018, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail demanding the Defendant to withdraw (hereinafter “this case’s content-certified mail”) upon the expiration of the instant lease agreement, which reaches the Defendant at that time.

On June 25, 2018, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the rent for two months other than the overdue rent paid to the Plaintiff. The Defendant continues to reside in the instant real estate until now.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the facts found in the judgment on the claim for delivery of the instant real estate, the instant lease agreement was terminated on June 12, 2018, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant real estate.

B. The judgment on the claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent is also based on the following: (a) the Defendant occupied the instant real estate after the termination of the instant lease agreement, obtained the benefit of use and incurred damages equivalent to the same amount to the Plaintiff, who is the lessor and the owner; (b) the Plaintiff is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the benefit of use to the Plaintiff; and (c) the amount is KRW 1 million per month the rent under the instant lease agreement

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2019.02.15 2018가단81659

-인천지방법원 2018.10.24 2018가단218600

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.04.24 2017가단6513

-부산지방법원 2019.09.19 2018가단19237

-전주지방법원군산지원 2019.06.21 2019가단1379