beta
(영문) 수원고등법원 2020.08.27 2019나18767

임대차보증금

Text

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited this part of the judgment, is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment under paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main

2. The addition of the Plaintiff’s claim is the return of the lease deposit on the ground that the lease deposit between the Defendant and the Defendant exists a lease agreement causing KRW 500 million.

However, at the trial court, the plaintiff presented documentary evidence related to the acquisition of the right of lease on a deposit basis, supporting the argument.

We examine this.

According to the evidence No. 11 (a contract for the change of chonsegwon) and evidence No. 12 (a written consent to the transfer of chonsegwon) of the former person having chonsegwon, G, on October 16, 2009, prepared a written consent to the transfer of chonsegwon with the purport that he/she consented to the transfer of the right to lease on a deposit basis (hereinafter referred to as “registration of the right to lease on a deposit basis”) registered with the Seoul District Court (U.S.) on April 29, 2003 to the Plaintiff. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20094, Feb. 2, 2009; Presidential Decree No. 20092, Feb. 15, 2013>

According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff can be recognized as having agreed with the defendant to acquire G's right of lease on a deposit basis.

However, according to the statement and the purport of evidence No. 5, the registration of creation of the right to lease on a deposit basis of this case was cancelled without being transferred to the plaintiff (the registration of creation of the right to lease on a deposit basis of evidence No. 5, which was submitted by the plaintiff, was in existence as of June 8, 2010, and matters concerning the subsequent registration, shall not remain in existence), and the registration of establishment of the right to lease on a deposit basis of this case shall be registered notwithstanding the above agreement.