(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.02.04 2019나31310

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) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.02.04 2019나31310

임대차보증금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 16, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease term as KRW 24 months from May 30, 2018, deposit money, and monthly rent as KRW 250,000 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. A large amount of rain around August 10, 2018, which led to the occurrence of a phenomenon of raising water on the floor of the instant building.

C. After the Plaintiff performed drainage work, around August 13, 2018, the Plaintiff removed the Plaintiff’s goods from the instant building.

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

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s claim on the claim for return of deposit for lease was concluded on August 13, 2018, and the Plaintiff delivered the instant building to the Defendant around the same time, the Defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit amount of KRW 2 million to the Plaintiff. 2) According to the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff and the Defendant divided the Plaintiff’s allegation about the restoration of the instant building to its original state and the termination of the instant lease contract after the date of the Plaintiff’s withdrawal from the instant building on August 13, 2018. However, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff was aware of the fact that the Plaintiff left the instant building at around that time, and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff was insufficient to conclude that the Plaintiff agreed to terminate the instant lease contract on August 13, 2018.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion based on the premise that the lease contract of this case was terminated by agreement is without merit.

The Plaintiff, even if the instant lease agreement was not terminated, is in accordance with the original purpose of the lease agreement by ordering the Defendant to suspend the instant building on August 13, 2018.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.02.04 2019나31310

-의정부지방법원 2020.07.02 2019가단135000

-서울북부지방법원 2019.10.30 2019가단114840

-의정부지방법원 2017.06.01 2016가단24796

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2014.04.11 2013가단32393