[배당이의][미간행]
In a case where Gap leased two sections of an aggregate building and used them as a single place of business without dividing them by walls, the case affirming the judgment below which held that a single lease relationship is not established with each other, but with each other as a single lease relationship established in a lump sum.
Article 2(1) and (2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act, Article 2(1)4 and (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act
Plaintiff
Korea Asset Management Corporation (Attorney Shin-hee, Counsel for defendant-appellant)
Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Na5798 decided June 11, 2013
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
The lower court determined that, in light of the following facts: (a) on October 30, 209, the Plaintiff entered into a single contract stating the part to be leased with the Nonparty on the second floor 201 and 202 of the instant aggregate building; (b) deposit KRW 100 million; and (c) around that time, the Plaintiff entered into the instant lease agreement; and (d) used the said Nos. 201 and 202 (hereinafter “each partitioned building of this case”) as one place of business without distinction by walls, etc. and operated the restaurant in the trade name of “○○○○○○○○○”); and (d) obtained the fixed date of the above contract from the Director of the Tax Office on April 19, 2010, it is reasonable to view that the lease agreement of this case was established by converting the deposit amount of KRW 100 million and KRW 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to lessees who have preferential right to payment under the Commercial
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Yong-deok (Presiding Justice)