logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2019.01.17 2018가단12585
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 8, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with Defendant B, who represented Defendant C, setting the lease deposit at KRW 70 million with respect to D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant apartment”) as the owner of Defendant C, and paid Defendant B the lease deposit at KRW 10 million as the down payment on the date of the said agreement, and KRW 60 million as the remainder on July 31, 2008. The said lease agreement was renewed by August 2014.

B. However, on August 6, 2014, upon the application of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), which is the right to collateral security of the instant apartment, the auction was conducted on August 7, 2014, and the auction was conducted on August 7, 2014. At that time, F’s claim amount was KRW 74,920,320 and interest interest for KRW 70,895,120.

C. On August 22, 2014, the Plaintiff discussed how to collect the lease deposit claim 70 million won for the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant lease deposit claim”) with Defendant C, and prepared a written confirmation (hereinafter “instant confirmation”) with the following contents. The Plaintiff’s wife H was determined as the purchaser, and entered into a sales contract with the purchase price of the instant apartment as KRW 150 million for the instant apartment, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant apartment in H. In that process, Defendant C did not receive a separate purchase price in addition to the confirmation provided by the Plaintiff or H.

3. In order to resolve the Plaintiff’s lease deposit, Defendant C transferred the ownership of the apartment of this case, and the Plaintiff acquired the obligation regarding the right to collateral security established on the apartment of this case.

4. The plaintiff completed the procedure set forth in the above 3. paragraph from Defendant C.

arrow