logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.05.12 2019가단571213
양수금
Text

1. Defendant C shall deliver to Defendant D the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2. Defendant D shall be attached to Defendant C.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 14, 2015, Defendant C, from Defendant D, leased the instant real estate with the terms of “the condition that the instant real estate be renewed for two years after October 1, 2017 and increases the monthly rent of KRW 100,000 (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”) from Defendant D, from October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2017” (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”).

B. On February 11, 2019, when lending KRW 7 million each of the above loans to Defendant C, Defendant C acquired KRW 7 million each of the above loans from Defendant C to secure each of the above loans. Defendant C delegated the authority to notify the above assignment of loans to E on the same day.

C. On June 20, 2019, E sent to Defendant D a notice of each of the above assignment of claims, and the notice was served on June 25, 2019.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was renewed on October 1, 2017, in accordance with the instant special agreement, for two years from October 1, 2017, and terminated on September 30, 2019 upon expiration of the period of validity:00.

In a case where a creditor intends to exercise a debtor’s right in order to preserve his/her own claim, it is ordinarily required as the debtor’s insolvency. However, in a case where a creditor seeks a name that the lessee’s house name needs to be implemented in order to claim the performance of the lease deposit that he/she acquired, and such name is deemed as having no relationship with the preservation of the claim and the existence of the lessor’s own

(Supreme Court Decision 88Meu4253, 4260 delivered on April 25, 1989). Therefore, Defendant C delivers the instant real estate to Defendant D, barring any special circumstance, and Defendant D is ① to the Plaintiff.

arrow