(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.03.14 2018가단208881

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) 서울서부지방법원 2019.03.14 2018가단208881

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

(a)the arrival has arrived, the principal content of which is:

* Contents-certified mail of September 11, 2017

6. Ultimately, the lessee does not have the right to be guaranteed the opportunity to recover the premium of the lessee provided for in Article 10-4 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, because he/she did not have any serious duty to deception the lessor (the Defendant) and to shoulder the trust relationship.

Accordingly, the lessee is in color a new lessee to enter into a contract for the transfer of rights, and the new lessee is scheduled to enter into the lease contract to you as the new lessee is colored.

7. In addition, the lessee did not wish to renew the real estate lease agreement relating to the commercial building of this case which was terminated on September 14, 2017, but does not intend to notify the lessee of the fact that the commercial building of this case cannot be ordered until the new lessee enters into a contract for the transfer of rights in physical color in order to guarantee the opportunity to recover the right under the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act.

* Contents-certified mail dated 12, 2018

8. In addition, the lessee colors new lessee to guarantee the opportunity to collect the premium. By January 25, 2018, the lessor (the Defendant) has the right to reply to the law firm as to whether the lessee wishes to conclude the lease contract with the new lessee in physical color and the specific terms and conditions of the contract (such as deposit for lease, monthly rent, etc.) until January 25, 2018. If there is no reply, the lessor is scheduled to initiate legal procedures to guarantee the right of the lessee.

* Contents-certified mail dated 22, 2018

4. In addition, the receiver (the Defendant) provided an answer that once in the wire call with the sender (Attorney B) ordered the commercial building of this case to discuss the issue of the premium, it could not be easily understood, and rejected the conclusion of the lease contract with the new lessee introduced by the lessee (the Plaintiff) and did not guarantee the lessor’s opportunity to recover the premium.

3 The plaintiff extended to Defendant D on March 2, 2018.

참조조문

-상가건물 임대차보호법

-상가건물 임대차보호법 제10조의4

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2017.10.31 2017나1916

-대법원 2019. 7. 4. 선고 2018다284226 판결

-수원지방법원 2018.05.30 2017나68141

-서울남부지방법원 2018.12.07 2018가합104185

-수원지방법원 2017.04.13 2016나60744