(영문) 제주지방법원 2018.12.05 2017나13335

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) 제주지방법원 2018.12.05 2017나13335

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 25, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased a building on five-story D ground (hereinafter “instant building”) from Jeju-si, Jeju-si, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 28, 2015.

B. Meanwhile, around June 2008, C entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the part of 89 square meters and six stories among the first floor of the instant building, and thereafter, the lease agreement was renewed. C and the Defendant entered into a lease agreement on June 10, 2014 with respect to the part of the first floor and the six stories among the instant building, and the lease agreement was concluded on June 15, 2014 to June 14, 2019, and the lease period was set as KRW 10 million (the first floor) and annual rent of KRW 1,50,000 (the first floor and KRW 1,000,000,000,000).

C. On September 28, 2016, the Plaintiff was issued a corrective order to voluntarily remove the six floors of the instant building by October 28, 2016, along with the notification that the Plaintiff constitutes an illegal building on the ground that the Plaintiff used the water tank room and garre part of the instant building for the purpose of housing, and extended the area of 51.33 square meters for the purpose of housing (hereinafter “instant corrective order”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion that he succeeded from C, the lease contract with the Defendant on the sixth floor part of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant lease contract”) was changed in accordance with the instant corrective order, the said lease contract was terminated by the delivery of the complaint of this case. However, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the part on the sixth floor of the instant building to the Plaintiff.

3. The termination of the contract due to the so-called change of circumstances occurs due to a significant change of circumstances that the parties could not have predicted at the time of the formation of the contract, and such change of circumstances occurred due to reasons not attributable to the party

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2017.11.10 2017가단56232

-부산지방법원 2018.10.04 2017가단308411

-서울서부지방법원 2016.09.07 2015가단200244

-제주지방법원 2016.01.26 2013가단19259

-서울고등법원 2019.09.20 2018나2058357