(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.06.24 2015나24531

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) 서울동부지방법원 2016.06.24 2015나24531

임대차보증금 등 청구

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed that the Plaintiff and the Defendant jointly leased the first floor of 40 and the fourth floor of 15 of the building on the ground of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant building”) among the buildings and divided one half of each building into the same size, and agreed that all the lease deposit, monthly rent, facility cost, and public charges shall be borne by each half.

B. On November 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant jointly leased the instant building from the lessor D with the following terms: “The term of lease from November 28, 2012 to November 30, 2014”; “20,000,000 won for lease deposit; and “the monthly rent of KRW 2,200,000 for value-added tax (excluding value-added tax)”.

C. Around November 2012, the Defendant paid KRW 20,000,000 to D the lease deposit stipulated under the above lease agreement. Around that time, the Defendant paid KRW 23,000,000 for facility expenses. The Plaintiff and the Defendant operated each store in the instant building from around that time.

From around that time to January 2013, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant KRW 10,000,000 and KRW 11,500,000, each of the facility costs.

On October 31, 2013, the Plaintiff removed the part of the instant building used by himself.

E. From October 2013 to November 2013, the Defendant paid 8,500,000 to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on October 2013 that “Around October 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant shall accept the Plaintiff’s leased portion, and leave the Plaintiff, but the Defendant shall refund KRW 21,500,000, which is the aggregate of the Plaintiff’s rental deposit and facility cost of the instant building.”

On October 31, 2013, the Plaintiff left the instant building and transferred the part used by himself to the Defendant according to this agreement.

However, the defendant did not return only KRW 8,500,000 to the plaintiff, and did not return the remainder of KRW 13,000,000.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.08.21 2018가합566947

-청주지방법원충주지원 2016.03.31 2015가단7261

-수원지방법원성남지원 2015.11.24 2014가합4725

-대구지방법원 2015.09.10 2014나20170

-대구지방법원 2016.10.25 2016가단186