임차보증금반환
1. The Defendant’s KRW 100,000,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from December 22, 2016 to September 19, 2017 to the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. Since November 30, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement between the limited liability company and the limited liability company (hereinafter referred to as “ELia”) with respect to the instant apartment with the lease deposit of KRW 84 million, while he/she leased B apartment 101 and 208 (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment”). On December 10, 201, the Plaintiff paid KRW 100 million to the said apartment with the lease deposit and the lease deposit of KRW 100 million until November 29, 2016. At that time, the Plaintiff paid the increased lease deposit and paid KRW 100 million to the said lease deposit.
B. On December 28, 2011, the Plaintiff completed the move-in report on the instant apartment and resided therein, and delivered the instant apartment to the Defendant on December 21, 2016.
C. Meanwhile, on November 30, 2016, Elsi completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of sale on the 25th day of the same month on the Cheongdo-do-limited liability company, and the Cheongdo-do-limited liability company completed the registration of transfer of ownership on November 30, 2016 to the Defendant on the same day.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 through 3, 7, 8, Gap's evidence 9-1, and 2's purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the facts of the determination on the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was terminated upon the lapse of November 29, 2016, and the expiration of the period.
On the other hand, even if the lease is terminated due to the expiration of the term of lease in the lease of a house with opposing power, the lessee is deemed to continue to exist until the deposit is returned pursuant to Article 4(2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act. Therefore, in cases where real estate which is the object of lease is transferred to the assignee pursuant to Article 3(4) of the same Act, the status of the lessor as the lessor is naturally succeeded when the lease is terminated (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da64615, Sept. 4, 2002).