logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2020.09.16 2019가단54422
건물명도(인도)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the member-gu Seoul Officetel D (hereinafter “instant building”) in Ansan-si.

E is a brokerage assistant of the “H Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” in the Ftel G in Ansan-si, Ansan-si.

B. The Defendant decided to lease the instant building with the introduction of E.

On August 5, 2018, the Defendant: (a) from the E, the lessor, the lessee, the Defendant, the rental deposit, the rental deposit, the lease term of KRW 75 million from August 5, 2018 to August 6, 2019; (b) the Plaintiff’s seal was presented and sealed on the lessee’s column; (c) the lease contract without the Plaintiff’s seal was issued and the seal was issued by E on August 16, 2018.

(hereinafter referred to as "the lease contract of this case" as stated in the lease contract of this case.

On July 31, 2018, the Defendant remitted KRW 5 million to E as the name of the instant lease deposit, and remitted KRW 10 million to the account in the name of E designated by E on August 8, 2018.

The Defendant and E agreed to receive the deposit of the Ftel J from the above Ftel J, which the Defendant had previously resided, for the remainder of the deposit of KRW 60,000,000, from E. D.

On August 6, 2018, the Defendant occupied and resided in the building of this case and removed on May 14, 2019.

E. Meanwhile, although the Plaintiff did not have been delegated the authority to conclude the instant lease agreement, E was indicted on charges of fraud, occupational breach of trust, etc. on February 6, 2020, and was convicted of the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) deceiving the Defendant as if he had the authority to conclude the instant lease agreement; (b) deceiving the Defendant from the Defendant as a security deposit deposit money; and (c) causing damage (75 million won and KRW 72 million after deduction of monthly rent deposit) equivalent to the obligation to return the deposit for the instant building; and (d) having been convicted of the Defendant on February 6, 2020.

grounds for recognition.

arrow