(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.11.25 2015나41067

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) 부산지방법원 2016.11.25 2015나41067

약정금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 1, 2014, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with respect to C and D and 3 floors of the Gangseo-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant building”), setting the lease deposit of KRW 25 million, KRW 25 million per month, and KRW 2.5 million per month, and the lease term from April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million to the Defendant on the same day.

B. On April 21, 2014, C and the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to change the lessee under the instant lease agreement from C to E (hereinafter “E”), and the Defendant consented thereto.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2 evidence, Eul 1-1 and Eul 2-2, the result of the party examination, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant promised the Plaintiff to complete rooftop water works, etc. until April 30, 2014 regarding the instant building, but did not implement the said promise.

On April 30, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the rescission of the instant lease agreement, and the Defendant agreed to refund the lease deposit to the Plaintiff by May 20, 2014.

Upon the lapse of May 20, 2014, the Defendant refused to comply with the agreement upon the Plaintiff’s request that the Plaintiff be delegated by C, and the Plaintiff was delegated with all rights regarding the instant lease agreement from C on June 10, 2014, and the Defendant agreed to refund the lease deposit to the Plaintiff by June 13, 2014 on the same day.

Therefore, even if the defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit to the plaintiff according to the above return agreement, and even if the above return agreement is not recognized, the lease contract of this case was cancelled due to the defendant's default or terminated the agreement, so the defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit to the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. We examine the determination as to the claim for the agreed amount.

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2017.09.14 2017나20104

-창원지방법원 2018.03.22 2017가합1066

-인천지방법원부천지원 2014.08.26 2014가단25490

-수원지방법원 2020.09.09 2019나84819

-의정부지방법원 2016.07.01 2015가단115466