(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2016.08.17 2016가단53428

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) 수원지방법원안산지원 2016.08.17 2016가단53428

건물명도

Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. The defendant A is a building listed in the attached Table 2;

B. Defendant B shall be the building listed in the attached Table 3.

Reasons

1. Basic facts: (a) 20,688,000 buildings listed in Attached Table 2 on October 23, 2013; (b) 226,00 buildings listed in Attached Table 3 on May 22, 2015; (c) 32,66,00; (d) 23,00,00 buildings listed in Attached Table 3 on December 16, 2014; (c) 23,00,000,000, 188, 560 and 12D 12,00 on December 31, 2014; and (d) 56,06,00,000,0000,000,000 on the leased object under Attached Table 4 on December 31, 2014; (d) 203,06,000,341, 84, 2017:

A. The Plaintiff leased an apartment complex specified in Paragraph (1) of the order, which is a public construction rental house, to the Defendants as follows. ① In the event that the Defendants were in arrears for more than three consecutive months, the Plaintiff may terminate the lease contract. ② The Defendants notified that the lease contract will be renewed by one month prior to the expiration date of the lease contract. In other cases, the Plaintiff agreed that the renewal of the lease contract may be refused.

(hereinafter “each of the instant lease agreements”). (b)

As of December 2015, the Defendants continued to delay in the same way as “the number of delayed months” in the above [Attachment] as of December 2015.

In addition, even though Defendant G was up to December 31, 2014, it did not notify the Plaintiff by no later than one month prior to the expiration of the lease term.

C. The Plaintiff knew the Defendants that each of the instant lease agreements was terminated by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint on the Defendants. The Defendants received each of them from January 20, 2016 to April 19, 2016.

[Judgment of the court below] Facts without a dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, each of the instant lease agreements was lawfully concluded following the termination of each of the instant lease agreements by the Plaintiff’s failure to pay rents more than three consecutive times by the Defendants, and the Plaintiff’s termination of each of the instant lease agreements.

Therefore, the defendants, each of the plaintiff 1. A.

Paragraph (4) shall be returned to the leased object stated therein.

3. The plaintiff's conclusion

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2016.04.21 2015가단237575

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.02.17 2016가단117966

-창원지방법원 2018.11.15 2017가합841

-청주지방법원충주지원 2015.06.25 2014가단21680

-인천지방법원 2018.01.10 2017가단234070