logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.06.23 2016가단123136
건물명도
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 14, 2013, the Defendant leased the three-story 312.73 square meters (hereinafter “the above building”) of the buildings indicated in the attached list from the Kmmmtex, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Kmtex”) to around three years from November 30, 2013, the deposit amount of KRW 30 million per month, the rent of KRW 1 million per month, and the period from November 30, 2013 to November 30, 2016, and completed the registration of business (trade name: CH, registration number: D), and until now the private teaching institute is operated in the above building.

B. The above building was originally owned by Kmhemtex, and on March 15, 2016, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of sale in the Plaintiff’s name on November 27, 2014. Accordingly, the Plaintiff succeeded to the lessor’s status under the said lease agreement.

C. On June 3, 2016 and June 23, 2016, the Plaintiff notified each of the Defendant that he/she would refuse the renewal of the above lease by content-certified mail. The above notification reached the Defendant around that time. On June 14, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the renewal of the above lease is required by content-certified mail, and the above notification reached the Plaintiff around that time.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2-1, 2-4, 3, 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's demand for renewal is unlawful or rejected for the following reasons.

① Since the Plaintiff was issued with a unique number certificate as a non-profit corporation that does not engage in profit-making business, the said building does not constitute a commercial building under the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act (hereinafter “Commercial Building Lease Protection Act”).

② The Plaintiff currently alters the current use of the above building, which is a second-class neighborhood living facility, to a religious facility, and it is necessary to extend it for such purpose, which falls under Article 10 (1) 7 (c) of the Commercial Building Lease Act.

③ Even though the Defendant leased only three floors among the buildings listed in the attached list, it shall be up to the 12th floor and the outer wall listed in the attached list.

arrow