(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.11.02 2017가단116927

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) 대구지방법원 2018.11.02 2017가단116927

임대차보증금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Chief;

A. On February 27, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Nonparty E (the former husband of the Defendant) who represented the Defendant, setting the rental deposit amount of KRW 35 million, monthly rent of KRW 200,000,000, and the lease period of 24 months with the other party E (the former husband of the Defendant).

B. After paying 30 million won for the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, around March 3, 2007, have increased the lease deposit with the Defendant around KRW 40 million, while using the instant apartment, and entered into a re-contract with the Defendant around March 3, 2007, setting the monthly rent at KRW 150,00 and the lease period at KRW 24 months (hereinafter the instant lease agreement). Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendant have impliedly renewed the instant lease agreement.

C. On April 2014, the Defendant denied the conclusion of the instant lease agreement and demanded the Plaintiff to deliver the instant real estate, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that he would deliver the instant real estate upon returning the rental deposit.

Therefore, the lease contract of this case is concluded according to the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, and if not, the plaintiff terminates the lease contract of this case by delivery of the complaint of this case.

E. Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay 40,000,000 won to the plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the apartment of this case from the plaintiff.

2. Despite the fact that the lease contract for the apartment of this case was a lease contract for the apartment of this case, the lease contract of February 27, 2005 and the lease contract of March 3, 2007 (Evidence A1 and 2) did not have a fixed date, and there is no further fact that the plaintiff completed the resident registration as the location of the apartment of this case.

In addition, there is also no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff paid 40,000,000 won to the Defendant at the time of entering into the instant lease agreement.

Therefore, in full view of the above facts, E is acting for the defendant.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2019.07.03 2019가단1151

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.10.18 2018가단58613

-광주고등법원(전주) 2008.10.10 2007나4450

-서울남부지방법원 2016.01.13 2015가단29729

-인천지방법원부천지원 2017.05.11 2016가단120542