(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.13 2019나29487

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.13 2019나29487

대위에 의한 명도 등 청구의 소

Text

Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Defendants in the judgment is modified as follows.

The Defendants are from the Plaintiff and B.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. 1) On August 31, 2013, 2013, real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”)

3) As to the lessor, the Plaintiff asserted that the lessor was the co-defendant B of the first instance trial (the Plaintiff asserted that he was his own co-defendant).

(2) On August 29, 2015, upon setting the lease deposit, 45,00,000 won for the lease deposit, and from September 4, 2013 to September 3, 2014, the special agreement entered into a lease agreement stipulating that “the redemption of the deposit for the subsequent lessee is possible with the consent of the E (or oral relationship).” The said lease deposit was paid to the Defendants around that time. (2) On August 29, 2015, upon increasing the above lease deposit, the lessor designated the Plaintiff as the Defendants, the lessee as the Plaintiff, and the lease agreement was made from September 4, 2015 to September 3, 2017 (hereinafter the said lease agreement referred to as “instant lease”). The lease deposit increased to the Defendants around that time.

3) The instant real estate occupies the said B around September 2013 and resides until now. (b) On November 16, 2017, the Plaintiff sent the content-certified mail stating that the instant lease contract is terminated to the Defendants around November 16, 2017.

2) The Defendants refused the return of the deposit on the ground that there is a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and B who is subject to the refund of the deposit. C) On February 27, 2019, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants for the return of the deposit for lease and the transfer of the instant real estate in subrogation of the Defendants, and the Plaintiff won the instant lawsuit in the first instance trial.

2) Only the Defendants appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and the lawsuit seeking extradition against B was separated and finalized. The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition is not established.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2015.05.08 2014가합201427

-부산지방법원 2018.01.10 2017가합46253

-서울동부지방법원 2015.06.19 2014가단21220

-대구지방법원 2021.04.09 2019가단131241

-수원지방법원 2017.11.01 2017나3243