(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.11.30 2018가단7958

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) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.11.30 2018가단7958

건물인도 등

Text

1. The defendant,

A. From 93,800,000 won to 93,80,000, the delivery of real estate listed in the separate sheet from October 24, 2018.

Reasons

On May 19, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the deceased C (hereinafter “C”) who is the Defendant’s spouse, with the content that the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) was leased to C by setting the deposit amount of KRW 175,00,000, and the rent from May 25, 2012 to May 24, 2014.

The Plaintiff delivered the instant apartment to C, and C paid the said deposit to the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff and C on May 25, 2014

The lease contract and security deposit stated in the port are identical (replacement for payment as an existing security deposit), but the re-contract was concluded between May 25, 2014 and May 24, 2016, with a period of KRW 350,000 per month.

C on May 30, 2014

Around June 3, 2014, the Gyeonggi Credit Guarantee Foundation notified the Plaintiff of the fact that the Gyeonggi Credit Guarantee Foundation delegated by C transferred the claim to return KRW 71,300,000, out of the deposit based on the re-contract stated in the subsection (hereinafter “transfer of claim”).

Plaintiff and C shall be on April 30, 2016.

The re-contract and security deposit stated in paragraph (1) are identical (re-contracts and security deposit shall be substituted for payment of existing security deposit), and the rent shall be increased to KRW 450,000 per month, and a re-contracts entered into between May 25, 2016 and May 24, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

After that, as the deceased C died on January 11, 2017, on April 2, 2017, the Defendant, D, and E, the heir, agreed on the division of inherited property, stating that “The claim for the return of deposit under the instant lease agreement, shall belong to the Defendant, and shall delegate all the authority regarding the instant lease agreement to the Defendant.”

On April 24, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of his intention not to renew the instant lease contract or not to conclude the renewal contract, and the notification reached the Defendant.

The defendant did not deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiff until the date of closing the argument of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, A(1) through (3)

유사 판례

-수원지방법원평택지원 2019.05.16 2018가단61367

-수원지방법원 2020.04.16 2019나70520

-서울동부지방법원 2016.04.06 2014가단111710

-서울북부지방법원 2019.04.09 2017가단26864

-서울서부지방법원 2018.03.27 2017가단215837