logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.07 2015나66334
기타(금전)
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 16,176,40 and its amount from May 1, 2010.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the arguments in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 2, 3, and 4-1 to 3, 5, 6, and 13.

The Plaintiff is an agent who entered into a comprehensive implementation contract with the F association (hereinafter “instant association”) which promoted the new construction project of E commercial buildings on the ground and underground of 4,144.3m2 in Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and around September 12, 2002, which is the land for the former B market and C market, and leased and sold the instant commercial building.

B. On June 23, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the Defendant for each lease sale contract (hereinafter “each lease sale contract of this case”) with each of the five-storys of the instant commercial buildings with each of the five-storys of the instant commercial buildings (3.9㎡ of the exclusive use area of one unit) (74,000,000 won as shown in the attached list, as shown in the attached list (hereinafter “each lease contract of this case”).

C. (1) Around February 24, 2010, the Defendant won the 5th floor store and the 197 store (hereinafter “each of the above stores”) from the 5th floor shop by drawing lots of the instant commercial building according to the instant lease contract. In the case of the 163 shop, the exclusive use area was 4.14 square meters in the case of the 163 shop, and the lease area including this was 17.35 square meters in the case of the 197 shop, and the exclusive use area was 3.9 square meters in the case of the 197 shop, but the lease area was 13.82 square meters in the case of the 197 shop, but the exclusive use area was 3.9 square meters in the case of the 197 shop.

B. On March 19, 2010, the Plaintiff settled the lease deposit according to the exclusive use area (based on the standard of 3.9 square meters), and the “rental deposit” according to the lease area (based on the standard of 13.22 square meters).

arrow