임대차보증금반환
1. Defendant B pays KRW 90,000,000 to the Plaintiff.
2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant C is dismissed.
3...
1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the following facts according to Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 6, witness D's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings:
A. Defendant C has been engaged in monetary transactions, such as receiving money from one another in close vicinity to Defendant B, as a lessor of real estate.
B. On March 14, 2012, Defendant C purchased the F building No. 809 (hereinafter “instant building”) under the name of Defendant B for KRW 123 million, from March 14, 2012, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 15, 2012.
C. On May 1, 2012, the Plaintiff leased the instant building with a deposit of KRW 90 million, the period from May 30, 2012 to May 29, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease”), and the lease contract was drafted by Defendant C on behalf of the Defendant B.
The lease of this case terminated upon the expiration of the lease term.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that Defendant C had entered into the instant lease agreement as a legitimate agent or expression agent of Defendant B and sought the return of the deposit upon the termination of the lease, and, in preliminary case, Defendant C is unable to prove his/her power of representation, the said Defendant asserted that he/she was responsible for the performance of the contract as a unauthorized agent and sought the return of the lease deposit against Defendant C.
According to the overall purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 4 through 6, Eul's evidence Nos. 6, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including various numbers), and Eul's testimony and arguments, at the time when defendant C entered into a sales contract with Eul, the former owner of the building of this case, the former owner of the building of this case, the defendant Eul was detained in prison, and the defendant C bears all the purchase price of KRW 123 million and KRW 2706,00,000, including acquisition tax, etc., and the defendant C borrowed KRW 80,000,000 from G and set up a lease on a deposit basis for the building of this case as security, but the above lease on a deposit basis was established.