(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.19 2014가단5113831

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.19 2014가단5113831

임대차보증금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C and the Plaintiff agreed to operate a postnatal care center (hereinafter “instant postnatal care center”).

The plaintiff is the spouse of E, who is a South-North Korean student of C.

B. On December 16, 2009, the Plaintiff and C entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 100,000,000 from December 30, 2009 to December 29, 2014 with respect to the building of the fourth and fifth floors in Songpa-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”) with the name of the lessee C, and paid KRW 100,000,000 to the Defendant.

C. On February 201, the Plaintiff and C registered the instant postnatal care center under the Plaintiff’s name. D.

On February 1, 2011, the Plaintiff and C concluded a lease agreement between Defendant and the term of lease on the instant building from March 1, 2011 to December 31, 2014, changing the lessee’s name from March 1, 2011 to December 31, 2014, changing the lessee’s name from C to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement between C to succeed to KRW 100 million of the lease deposit (hereinafter “second lease agreement”).

E. C: (a) on November 19, 2012, between the Defendant and the Defendant, the term of lease regarding the instant building was changed from December 31, 2012 to December 31, 2014; (b) the lease deposit was increased to KRW 200 million; (c) the lessee’s name was changed to C; and (d) C was a third lease agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to succeed to KRW 100 million.

A) Around that time, the Defendant paid KRW 100,00,000 for the lease deposit increased to the Defendant. [The respective descriptions of evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 3, and No. 5, and No. 13, based on recognition, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The parties asserted (1) The Plaintiff entered into a secondary lease agreement with the Defendant, and succeeded to the status of the lessee C.

However, the Defendant, without any notification to the Plaintiff, concluded the third lease contract with C as the lessee around February 2013.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.01.20 2014가합8651

-서울고등법원 2015.09.04 2015나6359

-서울북부지방법원 2015.04.09 2014가합1861

-인천지방법원 2020.05.07 2019가단237837

-청주지방법원 2015.07.15 2014나6740