(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2020.07.22 2020가단64456

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) 수원지방법원안산지원 2020.07.22 2020가단64456

보증금반환

Text

1. The defendant shall receive from the plaintiff a 35.52 square meters of heading D, 35.52 square meters of title C in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, and simultaneously make the plaintiff 90,000.

Reasons

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the defendant on February 8, 2018 on the deposit amount of KRW 90 million with respect to No. 35.52 square meters (hereinafter "the real estate in this case") located in Ansan-gu, Sinsan-si (hereinafter "the real estate in this case"), which is owned by the defendant, and the period from February 23, 2018 to February 23, 2020 (hereinafter "the lease agreement in this case"), and that the defendant paid the deposit amount of KRW 90 million around that time.

According to this, the instant lease contract was terminated on February 23, 2020 after the expiration of the period.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the lessor is obligated to return the deposit amount of KRW 90 million to the Plaintiff, which is the lessee.

In regard to this, the defendant's obligation to return the lease deposit of this case defense that the plaintiff's obligation to deliver the real estate of this case has a simultaneous performance relationship. Thus, if the lease contract is terminated due to the expiration of the lease period, the lessee has a duty to order the object of the lease and the lessor has a duty to return all the remainders arising from the lease contract of this case, such as overdue rent, etc., and the lessor has a simultaneous performance relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 80Da1495, Feb. 10, 1981). Since there is no dispute over the fact that the defendant delivered the real estate of this case to the plaintiff after the conclusion of the lease contract of this case and possessed by the plaintiff, the plaintiff is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the defendant due to the termination of the lease contract of this case

Therefore, the defendant's defense pointing this out is justified.

Ultimately, the Defendant is obliged to return the deposit amount of KRW 90 million to the Plaintiff simultaneously with the delivery of the instant real estate from the Plaintiff.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable within the scope of the above recognition.

참조판례

-대법원 1981. 2. 10. 선고 80다1495 판결

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2020.11.13 2019가단19198

-울산지방법원 2020.05.26 2019가단120144

-수원지방법원 2018.11.28 2018가합2304

-수원지방법원 2019.03.14 2018가단543105

-수원지방법원안산지원 2020.01.08 2019가단3042