(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.06.28 2017가단114672

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) 청주지방법원 2018.06.28 2017가단114672

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Orderly, each point of the real estate listed in the separate sheet is indicated in the annexed sheet 1, 2, 3, 4, 1.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 26, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2018, with respect to the second anniversary of the underground floor of a building A located in the petition-gu, Cheongju-si, the rent of KRW 450,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 450,000 without any deposit.

B. The above lease agreement states, at the bottom of the special agreement, that “this contract has been re-preparation upon D’s request on September 26, 2017.”

C. From June 2017 to December 201, the Defendant did not pay a total of 2.7 million won (=45 x 17) monthly rent from June 2017. The Plaintiff expressed in the instant complaint the intent to terminate the lease agreement with the Defendant.

The name of the business operator who operates the head of the S Team tax office in the third basement of the underground floor of the above building A (the part (A) connected with each point of the attached Form No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 in sequence; hereinafter “the third vice head of the instant case”) is the defendant.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 or 6

2. The plaintiff asserts that since the lease contract was terminated due to the defendant's delinquency in payment of monthly rent, the defendant is obligated to return the case to the plaintiff and pay the overdue rent to the plaintiff.

On March 14, 2017, the Defendant agreed to transfer the instant third secretary general to D on March 14, 2017. However, at the time of receiving the third secretary general from the former lessee D, the representative of the Plaintiff E promised to transfer the third secretary general to the outside, but the third secretary general was in charge of D again because the third secretary general failed to perform his duties.

3. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the party Do Governor on the instant case, but around March 2017, the Defendant would be subject to the acquisition by the party Do Governor from D, and the Plaintiff would have entered into the instant lease agreement with the Defendant around September 26, 2017.

Further to these facts recognized earlier.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2017.08.31 2016나75371

-인천지방법원 2021.02.19 2019고정2150

-수원지방법원안양지원 2016.03.30 2015가단2285

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2016.06.24 2016고정130

-대전지방법원천안지원 2019.04.24 2018가단9124