logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.01.15 2018가단113324
보증금반환
Text

1. The Defendants: KRW 66,500,000 for each Plaintiff and the Defendants’ respective cases from November 19, 2016 to May 25, 2018 for Defendant A.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that supports the pre-paid rental housing with the Housing and Urban Fund established under Article 3(2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act for the purpose of stabilizing the residential life of the low-income homeless.

The support project for the lease-to-rent rental housing is conducted by the plaintiff in the way that the plaintiff concludes a lease contract with the housing owner, and the person eligible for support enter into a lease contract with the housing owner, and the amount equivalent to about 5% of the lease-to-rent deposit is paid by the plaintiff to the Housing and Urban Fund.

B. On August 26, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the owner E on the part of the Defendant B on the condition that he/she would be entitled to support for the Defendant B, and leased the instant apartment acquired as above to the Defendant B at KRW 110,830 per month rent on the same day, as prescribed by the above support program.

(A) No. 1-2) The Plaintiff paid KRW 66.5 million to the lessor E on September 14, 2011 according to each of the above contracts.

Meanwhile, Article 8 of the aforementioned lease contract states, “If the contract term expires or the contract is terminated or terminated, the lessor shall return the full amount of the deposit money (including the occupants’ share) to the lessee (the Plaintiff) in the bank account of the lessee.”

C. E completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant A, the wife of Defendant B, on September 5, 201, following the lease agreement and the lease agreement, on the grounds of sale on August 3, 201, the lease agreement and the immediately preceding lease agreement.

Since then, Defendant B, who had implicitly renewed the lease contract, was the owner of the instant apartment around June 2015, and the telephone number, address, and resident registration number of Defendant A, his wife, who was his wife.

arrow