logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.06.20 2019가단101300
임대차보증금
Text

1. On October 11, 2019, upon arrival of the date, the Defendant is simultaneously simultaneously with the Plaintiff’s delivery of the C apartment units D from the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 24, 2014, the Plaintiff leased the lease deposit amount of KRW 160,000,000, and the lease term of KRW 11,000 from October 11, 2014 to October 11, 2016, the Plaintiff leased the C Apartment-gu Seoul Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from the Defendant.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant agreed to obtain a loan of the lease on a deposit basis for the payment of the lease deposit. On October 10, 2014, the Plaintiff obtained a loan of KRW 128,000,000 from E Co., Ltd. on and around October 11, 2016, by adding the above loan to the Defendant, and received a delivery of the instant apartment from the Defendant, by paying KRW 160,000,000 as the deposit for the instant lease agreement.

C. On August 3, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a renewed contract by extending the term of the instant lease agreement from October 11, 2016 to October 11, 2019.

(hereinafter “instant renewal contract”). [Grounds for recognition] Gap’s 1, 4, Eul’s 1-4 evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The cause of the claim and the judgment thereof

A. As the Defendant had anticipated a decline in the apartment price, the Plaintiff deceptioned the Plaintiff to enter into the instant renewal contract with the term of the lease contract up to October 11, 2019, the said renewal contract is null and void due to a juristic act contrary to social order, and the term of the instant apartment lease has already been terminated on October 11, 2018. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit, since there is no clear ground to deem the renewal contract as null and void.

B. Next, even if the renewal contract of this case is valid, the Plaintiff, at the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, agreed to the Plaintiff’s loan of the loan of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease of the lease,

arrow