건물명도
1. The appeal by the respondent (quasi-Review Plaintiff) is dismissed;
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the respondent.
1. On May 7, 2014, an applicant for the establishment of the call for filing a lawsuit (hereinafter “Defendant”) filed an application for the telephone damage with the Respondent (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) (hereinafter “the call for filing a lawsuit in this case”). On June 30, 2014, the Plaintiff’s attorney, C Law Firm C, Attorneys D and the attorney-at-law, the Defendant’s attorney, appeared on the date of filing a lawsuit on the date of filing a lawsuit, and drafted a protocol of compromise (hereinafter “instant protocol of conciliation”) as shown in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant protocol”).
Accordingly, the telephone call between the plaintiff and the defendant was established.
(In the attached Form 1, the applicant shall be the plaintiff in the case of the defendant, the respondent in the case of the settlement clause). (The ground for recognition)
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is to restrict the Plaintiff’s financial transaction under his/her name as a person with bad credit standing, and thus, the Plaintiff leased a commercial building in his/her name as a person with bad credit standing around October 2013, and subsequently, transferred the commercial building from the Defendant to operate the Tongdochouse, thereby making a sublease contract between the Defendant and the Defendant.
Since security deposit and premium necessary to rent the above commercial building have been created by the plaintiff, the actual right holder of the above commercial building is the plaintiff.
(2) However, around April 2014, the Defendant, while having to undergo authentication in the said sub-lease contract, signed the Plaintiff’s signature in the sub-lease contract. The Plaintiff believed it and did not read the contents of the sub-lease contract presented by the Defendant, and later, the said documents were the Plaintiff’s letter of delegation of litigation (Evidence B) for the purpose of filing the instant lawsuit telephone, and the Defendant prepared a protocol of conciliation in favor of himself/herself after appointing D attorneys as the Plaintiff’s legal representative using the said letter of delegation of litigation.
(3) Accordingly, the instant protocol of conciliation is the Civil Procedure Act.