logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.26 2014가단255853
배당이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that, on November 20, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D’s underground floor (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and paid all the above lease deposits in cash, the Plaintiff asserted that, without a separate broker broker, “the delivery of the instant real estate on December 20, 2012 and the lease deposit amount of KRW 35 million until December 9, 2014” and “the lease deposit of KRW 3.5 million shall be paid on the date of the contract, and the remainder amount of KRW 31,50,000 shall be paid on the date of the contract, and the lease agreement was concluded and all of the lease deposits shall be paid in cash, so the Plaintiff is the genuine lessee of the instant real estate and thereafter satisfies the requirements for counterclaim under Article 3(1) of the Housing Lease Protection Act prior to the commencement of the auction as a small lessee of the instant real estate, the Plaintiff shall have to obtain the claim of the instant distribution order prior to the decision to commence the auction.

2. Determination

A. There is no dispute over the facts subsequent to the facts of recognition, and it can be recognized in full view of the respective entries and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings, and contrary thereto, the testimony in Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, 9, and 11 (including additional numbers) and witness E is difficult to believe, and the testimony in Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5, and 8 (including additional numbers) are insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff is a true lessee.

(1) At the time of conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the instant real estate was set on May 26, 2008, the first priority mortgage, which is the maximum debt amount of 72 million won, which is the creditor of the right to collateral security, as of May 26, 2008, and on July 23, 2010, the Defendant of the right to collateral security (the maximum debt amount of 165 million won) was set up.

on July 16, 2010, immediately before the establishment of the second priority right, F, a relative relative of the Plaintiff, prepared a written confirmation that he/she resides in the instant real estate without compensation (Evidence 1).

arrow