beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.15 2019나28330

임대차계약 무효확인의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's supplementary claim is dismissed in this court.

3...

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following "2. Additional Judgment" with respect to the conjunctive claims added by the plaintiff in this court, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s conjunctive assertion added in this court the claim to confirm that the instant lease agreement was rescinded pursuant to Article 565 of the Civil Act as follows.

In other words, the Plaintiff, while entering into the instant lease agreement, received KRW 8 million down payment from the Defendant, which is the down payment in the nature of the cancellation fee, notified the Defendant on May 27, 2019 that the Plaintiff, who is the down payment, paid the double amount of the down payment and cancelled the instant lease agreement, and on June 12, 2019, deposited KRW 16 million against the Defendant on June 18, 2019, and the said deposit reached the Defendant on June 18, 2019. Therefore, the instant lease agreement was rescinded on June 18, 2019.

B. (1) The Civil Act Article 565(1) provides that “In a case where one of the parties to a transaction delivers money or other things at the time of the contract as a down payment, a deposit, etc. to the other party, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the person who gives up it and the receiver may cancel the contract by repaying the double amount, and the latter may cancel the contract by paying it.” This provision is applicable mutatis mutandis to a commercial contract other than the sale pursuant to

(2) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2-2, evidence Nos. 3, 4 (including each number), 7, 8, and 12, as well as the overall purport of the Plaintiff’s examination and arguments in the first instance trial, the Plaintiff decided to deliver the instant real estate without delay after entering into a contract at the time of the instant lease agreement to the Defendant, the lessee, and the Defendant paid the annual rent of KRW 15 million within 30 days after obtaining permission for development activities, and the contract is concluded.