logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.12.12 2018나8680
임대차보증금반환
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. On November 18, 2013, Plaintiff C, on behalf of the Plaintiff, entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff, setting lease deposit amount of KRW 46,00,000, and two years from November 18, 2013 to November 18, 2015, to lease KRW 46,000,000, among the multi-family houses of the fourth floor of the D-based reinforced concrete structure slab roof owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant house”). The Plaintiff paid the Defendant the lease deposit amount of KRW 46,00,000 on the same day.

The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to terminate the said lease agreement on April 15, 2018, even after the termination of the lease term stipulated in the said lease agreement, and the Plaintiff delivered the instant house to the Defendant on April 15, 2018.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount of KRW 46,000,000 and damages for delay under the above lease agreement.

B. The Defendant, on November 18, 2013, concluded a lease agreement with the Plaintiff on the instant housing as alleged by the Plaintiff. Since C acquired the instant housing and used it, the lessee of the said lease agreement is C.

In addition, between August 19, 2018 and September 10, 2018, the Defendant paid KRW 45,855,000,00, which deducts KRW 145,000 for the repair cost of the instant house from the lease deposit amount of KRW 46,00 under the said lease agreement.

2. The following circumstances, i.e., the tenant column of the lease contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) drafted as of November 18, 2013 with respect to the instant housing, written as of November 18, 2013, indicated the name and resident registration number of C, not the Plaintiff, and the name side of the contract appears to be the Plaintiff’s signature.

arrow