beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.07.03 2019나55200

기타(금전)

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 16, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for a compulsory auction of real estate with Busan District Court E on May 16, 2018 for the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by D as a notarized creditor of D (hereinafter “instant building”). Accordingly, the current auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) is in progress.

B. In the instant auction procedure, on May 31, 2018, the Defendant asserted that he/she was a lessee who entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) as of March 16, 2018, and filed a report on the right and a request for distribution of the instant building by asserting that he/she is a lessee who entered into the lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) as of March 16, 2018, from March 16, 2018 to March 15, 2021, from March 16, 2018 to May 8, 2018.

C. On the other hand, D and the defendant's domicile were changed as follows.

Defendant D on June 14, 2016, 2018.3. 19, 2018.3.5.29, May 29, 2018, 2018 of the instant building: (a) there is no dispute over the Busan Jung-gu G, and two floors (based on recognition); (b) Gap's 1, 2, 3, and Eul's 8 (including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is the most lessee and that there is no claim for the return of the lease deposit by the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that he is the true lessee who has the claim for the return of the lease deposit amounting to KRW 70,000.

B. In full view of the following facts and circumstances, the evidence mentioned earlier, evidence Nos. 4 through 9, evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and each fact-finding with respect to the Ltel management office of the first instance court, which can be seen as the whole purport of the pleadings, the Defendant is the most lessee.

Therefore, there is no claim for refund of deposit of KRW 70,000,000 under the instant lease agreement between the Defendant and D, and the instant case.