(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.05.29 2019가단8545

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) 창원지방법원 2020.05.29 2019가단8545

임대보증금반환

Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 10,680,983 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its amount from February 27, 2020 to May 29, 2020.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 28, 2012, the Plaintiff leased the entire lease deposit amount of KRW 60,00,000 from September 30, 2012 to September 30, 2015, the lease agreement was explicitly renewed after the lease agreement.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

The Plaintiff was running a store in the instant store, but it was no longer able to conduct its business due to health problems. Around September 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease agreement, and notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease agreement, and filed a report on the closure of the business with the word store on December 26, 2018.

C. The Plaintiff’s husband and wife demanded the Defendant to return the lease deposit of the instant store in the letter book, and the Defendant respondeded on April 23, 2019 to B in two installments, such as the end of May and the end of June, 2019, but the Plaintiff refused this and filed the instant principal suit.

On February 26, 2020, the Defendant deposited KRW 51,860,000 among the deposit money for the lease of the instant store.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 3-1, the purport of whole pleadings

2. On December 26, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a report on the closure of business registration, and filed a lease deposit and damages for delay with the Defendant on the premise that the Defendant provided the performance of the instant order for the name of the store.

The tenant's duty to order the lessee's leased object and the lessor's duty to return the deposit is a simultaneous performance relationship.

Therefore, in order to extinguish a lessor's right to defense of simultaneous performance and to recognize a lessor's obligation to delay the refund of the deposit, the lessee must provide the lessor with an explanation of the leased object.

The lessee moves out of the leased object.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원군산지원 2020.05.19 2020가단143

-부산지방법원 2017.06.23 2016나54343

-광주지방법원 2020.11.27 2020가단13385

-서울남부지방법원 2019.08.27 2019가합102339

-창원지방법원 2020.04.16 2020가합50242