beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.08.09 2018가단2812

임대차보증금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 129,50,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 29, 2017 to February 26, 2018 for the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 22, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the lease deposit amounting to KRW 129,50,000, and the term of lease from March 11, 2016 to March 11, 2018 with respect to the Gwangju-si Building 109, 102 (hereinafter “the loan of this case”) on October 22, 2015, stating that “the term of lease shall be calculated on the basis of the occupancy date regardless of the remaining date” as a special agreement.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”). (b)

From November 13, 2015, the Plaintiff resided in the instant loan, and the term of lease expires two years after the date of occupancy. On November 15, 2017, the Plaintiff transferred the instant loan to the Defendant on December 28, 2017, by transmitting text messages the password of the instant loan and the password of the joint signature number to the Defendant.

[Evidence Evidence] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the defendant shall refund the lease deposit to the plaintiff according to the expiration of the lease contract of this case, and the plaintiff delivered the loan of this case to the defendant on December 28, 2017. As such, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above lease deposit amount of KRW 129,50,000 and damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from December 29, 2017 to February 26, 2018, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, from February 26, 2018, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable.