(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.02.14 2018가단23892

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 2019.02.14 2018가단23892

건물명도 등

Text

1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. From September 26, 2018, the above-mentioned A

(b).

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 11, 2017, the Plaintiffs sharing the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) at the ratio of 1/2 shares, concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant by setting the lease deposit of KRW 2 million, monthly rent of KRW 250,000 (after payment, monthly rent of KRW 250,000), and the lease term of the instant real estate from October 25, 2017 to October 24, 2019, and the Defendant received the instant real estate by paying the deposit to the Plaintiffs around that time.

B. At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiffs agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement if the Defendant’s delayed amount reaches the amount of two rents.

C. The Defendant paid each of the Plaintiffs KRW 250,00,000 to the Plaintiffs, KRW 250,000 on November 6, 2017, KRW 250,000 on December 1, 2017, KRW 250,00 on January 2, 2018, and KRW 250,00 on October 5, 2018.

The duplicate of the complaint of this case, on September 21, 2018, stating the plaintiffs' declaration of intent to terminate the lease contract of this case on the grounds of the delinquency in rent of two or more times, reaches the defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the fact of recognition on the duty to deliver real estate, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated on September 21, 2018 by the Plaintiffs’ declaration of termination due to the failure to pay rent for more than two years.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiffs.

The defendant raises a defense to the effect that the obligation of the plaintiffs to pay the remainder after deducting the overdue rent from the lease deposit and the obligation of the defendant to deliver the real estate of this case are simultaneously performed. However, as seen below, since the obligation of the plaintiffs to return the deposit has ceased to exist, the above defense is without merit

(b)the rent or rent shall be reasonable.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.04.19 2017가단28586

-전주지방법원정읍지원 2015.11.24 2015가단2759

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.11.23 2017가단23003

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2018.09.06 2018가합50851

-인천지방법원 2020.10.16 2020가단234940