(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.11.22 2018가합59410

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 2019.11.22 2018가합59410

임대차보증금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 252,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from January 20, 2019 to November 22, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 19, 2016, the Plaintiff leased a lease deposit of KRW 300,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 8,000 (or KRW 9,000,00 per month in case of delinquency in payment of rent) from D where the owner of each real estate of this case was the owner of each of the instant real estate at the time of Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City building with KRW 288,00 square meters and its ground-based five floors (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”). From December 23, 2016 to December 23, 2018, the Plaintiff leased each of the instant real estate with the lease deposit of KRW 300,000,00,000 from D and operated the accommodation business after delivery of each of the instant real estate.

B. On June 24, 2016, the Defendant entered into a contract with D to exchange each of the instant real estate owned by D and E hotel real estate owned by the Defendant and the Defendant’s wife with each other (hereinafter “instant exchange contract”). On February 22, 2018, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for each of the instant real estate.

C. The Plaintiff initially maintained the business registration in the name of D and operated the lodging business in each of the instant real estate, but the business registration in the said D’s name was closed, and the Plaintiff failed to operate the lodging business in each of the instant real estate from June 22, 2018, and the Defendant operated the lodging business in each of the instant real estate from August 2, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (including each number in the case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant succeeded to the lessor’s status of the instant lease agreement and sought the return of the lease deposit.

3. Determination

A. The transfer of the status of the lessor in the lease contract is accompanied by the transfer of the duty of the lessor, but the duty of the lessor is not particularly different from the method of the lessor's performance by whom the lessor is authorized, and it can be performed entirely in the status of the owner of the object.

유사 판례

-서울행법 2018. 11. 23. 선고 2018구합70578 판결

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2013.10.08 2013구합346

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2015.05.01 2015고정233

-서울서부지방법원 2019.06.05 2019고단1125

-부산지방법원동부지원 2017.10.25 2017가단1075