손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On February 27, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with Defendant B, a licensed real estate agent, to rent KRW 30,00,00 on a deposit basis (hereinafter “instant building”) of KRW 30,000 of the entire building of multi-household housing of 4 stories in Yongsan-gu Seoul (hereinafter “the instant multi-household housing”) among the entire building of 501 stories in Yongsan-gu (hereinafter “the instant multi-household housing”), with the entire building of 30,000 square meters in total, and the down payment of KRW 3,00,000 in contract payment. The remainder payment of KRW 27,00,000 shall be paid on March 24, 2007; the lease term shall be from March 24, 2007 to March 26, 2009.
The plaintiff paid the full amount of the lease deposit to C, resided in the building of this case, and completed the move-in report on March 29, 2007.
B. The Plaintiff, upon the expiration of the instant lease agreement, requested C to return the deposit, but C did not return the deposit. On December 6, 2010, the Plaintiff issued a decision to return the deposit KRW 30,000,000 on December 13, 2010 upon filing an application for payment order with the Seoul Western District Court Decision 201 tea8505, Seoul Western District Court (hereinafter “Seoul Western District Court”) and became final and conclusive around that time.
On the other hand, with respect to subparagraph 1 of multi-household housing of this case, the Plaintiff was set up a right to collateral security with a maximum debt amount of KRW 30,000,000 on September 10, 2010.
However, there was no amount distributed to the plaintiff in the auction procedure of real estate E in the Seoul Western District Court regarding No. 1 of the above underground floor.
C. In the present situation of the instant building, each floor of the instant multi-household housing is one section for exclusive use. At the time of the instant lease agreement, C owned Nos. 1, 101, 201, and 401 of the underground floors.
The building of this case is not registered as an independent sectional ownership in the area where the building of this case was illegally expanded (the area of the rooftop in the public injury was 5.06 square meters) and is not registered as an independent sectional ownership.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1, 2, 7 to 9.