logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.01.12 2017가단228129
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Korea Development Bank of Korea with the Defendant Co., Ltd. is 100,000.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 31, 2009, the Plaintiff leased the real estate indicated in the attached list (hereinafter the instant real estate) to the Defendant Korea Development Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter the Defendant Company) with the lease deposit amount of KRW 100 million, monthly rent of KRW 320,000, and the lease term of two years.

B. Since then, the above lease agreement continued to be renewed and increased to KRW 3.4 million on July 4, 2014. On July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company concluded a lease agreement with the lease term up to June 30, 2017, with the lease term up to KRW 3.5 million on July 25, 2016.

C. On April 26, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant Company a written “request for the termination of the contract upon the expiration of the contract term,” stating that “The instant real estate lease agreement will expire on June 30, 2017.”

Meanwhile, Defendant B is a person who occupies the instant real estate upon being entrusted by the Defendant Company to operate convenience points in the instant real estate.

E. The Defendant Company paid all rent to the Plaintiff by November 2017 regarding the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3-1 to 3

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, since the lease contract concluded on the instant real estate was terminated on June 30, 2017, the agreement was terminated, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent in proportion to the amount of KRW 3850,000 per month from December 1, 2017 to the completion date of delivery of the instant real estate.

However, since the lessor’s obligation to return the deposit and the lessee’s obligation to return the object after the expiration of the lease contract are concurrently performed, the Defendant Company received a refund from the Plaintiff, at the same time, of KRW 100 million of the lease deposit for the instant real estate.

arrow