beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.02.15 2016가단68406

보증금반환

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 12,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from September 27, 2016 to February 15, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On August 8, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) leased a building C and B01 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from the Defendant in light of his/her ownership from the Defendant to KRW 27 million as a lease deposit (hereinafter “instant lease”); (b) from around that time, the Plaintiff resided together with D, a de facto spouse in the instant real estate.

On July 2014, the Plaintiff retired from the instant real estate due to the Ma, which continued to reside in the instant real estate, and died on July 31, 2016.

On August 23, 2016, the Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement and sent the content-certified mail claiming the return of the lease deposit amount of KRW 27 million to the Defendant. The content-certified mail reached the Defendant around that time.

At present, the real estate in this case is delivered to the defendant, and the defendant also acknowledges that the lease contract in this case has been terminated.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3-1, 2, and 5-3 of evidence, witness E's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, as the instant lease agreement was terminated on August 2016, the Defendant is obligated to refund the lease deposit amount of KRW 27 million to the Plaintiff and the delay damages therefrom.

As to this, the Defendant asserts that the lessee under the instant lease agreement is not D but D, and even if not, the Plaintiff was to recover KRW 15 million from the Defendant around July 2014, and that since the lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated, it is merely obligated to refund KRW 10 million to D’s inheritors, deducting KRW 2 million from the remainder of the lease deposit.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 5 as to the lessee of the instant lease agreement and the testimony of witness E, namely, ① the following circumstances.