(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.06.01 2016가단111065

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) 의정부지방법원 2017.06.01 2016가단111065

건물인도 등

Text

1. The defendant shall pay KRW 1,204,838 to the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. One of the costs of lawsuit;

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 24, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement and renewed the lease agreement. On June 24, 2009, the part (A) of the attached Form No. 66.11m2 (hereinafter “the instant building”) connected each point of the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 10m2 among the real estate listed in the attached Table No.

(3) The term of the lease contract with respect to the term of the lease deposit amounting to KRW 5,00,000, KRW 350,000 per month (repaid on July 30, 200), and the term of the lease from July 30, 2009 to July 29, 201 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

(2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant, upon renewal of the instant lease agreement, have increased to KRW 400,00 per month as the tea around October 2013, and KRW 450,00 per month as the tea around March 2015.

B. The Defendant did not pay the rent in arrears from September 2012 to April 2013 and from September 2015.

C. On April 6, 2016, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the lease agreement to the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant was in arrears at least twice, sent the instant lease agreement to the Defendant on April 20, 2016, and the content-certified mail reached the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that the instant lease contract was terminated on April 20, 2016 by the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to terminate the lease on at least two occasions.

Therefore, the Defendant, barring special circumstances, is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, and pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent accrued from April 30, 2016 to the delivery date of the instant building as sought by the Plaintiff after the termination date of the instant lease agreement.

B. On July 9, 2016, the Defendant rendered a judgment on the defense of this case.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2017.06.01 2016가단36263

-수원지방법원 2017.12.07 2017가단6722

-의정부지방법원 2018.02.08 2017가단120479

-인천지방법원 2018.10.24 2018가단218600

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.14 2017가단5014799