(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.11.02 2017나305629

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 2017.11.02 2017나305629

임대차보증금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 14, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on the condition that “10,000,000 won for the lease deposit, monthly rent of KRW 500,00 for the rent, and from December 14, 2007 for the lease period of KRW 60,00 for the first basement 56 (hereinafter “instant building”).

The Plaintiff paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant around that time.

B. The Plaintiff operated the instant karaoke machine business at the instant building during the period of the said lease agreement (hereinafter referred to as “D-sing machine business”).

C. The instant lease agreement continued to be renewed after the agreed lease term.

After that, the Plaintiff agreed to terminate the above lease agreement with the Defendant around April 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was lawfully terminated upon the termination of agreement around April 2016.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the lease deposit of KRW 10,000,000 and damages for delay, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff did not return the key of the building of this case by failing to fulfill his duty to deliver the building of this case, and that the plaintiff's duty to deliver the building of this case is in a simultaneous performance relationship with the defendant's duty to return the lease deposit. Thus, the plaintiff's claim cannot be complied with

In the event of the termination of a lease contract, the lessor’s obligation to return the lease deposit and the lessee’s obligation to deliver the leased object are concurrently performed. However, if one of the parties to a bilateral contract provides reality as to the obligations to be borne by himself/herself, the other party will be omitted to the recipient body, and the other party will continue to provide such obligation.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2016.10.11 2016가단226144

-수원지방법원안산지원 2019.10.30 2019가단58592

-대구지방법원 2016.08.11 2015나18402

-창원지방법원마산지원 2019.09.18 2019가단104795

-수원지방법원 2020.05.13 2019가합22244