logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.12.08 2017가단8453
건물명도
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 16, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) leased, respectively, the real estate indicated in the [Attachment] real estate (hereinafter “instant apartment”) to the Defendant’s children as KRW 25,000,000; (b) monthly rent of KRW 1,000,000; and (c) the term of lease from April 8, 2016 to April 7, 2018.

B. C transferred the Plaintiff’s monthly rent of KRW 5,00,000 to the Plaintiff’s account by September 30, 2016, upon the Plaintiff’s payment of the said deposit. On August 3, 2016, upon the resident registration, the Plaintiff was transferred to a place other than the said apartment, with his/her mother’s family, and the Plaintiff was transferred to the said apartment on January 16, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. On the premise that the defendant occupied the apartment of this case, the plaintiff sought the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the above apartment rent and delivery of the apartment of this case, but the defendant cannot be deemed to possess the above apartment of this case merely because the defendant made the move-in report to the above apartment of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion based on the premise of possession is without merit without further review.

(In light of the fact that C, a lessee of the above apartment, has made a move-in report on the above apartment in the name of the defendant who is a family member for the purpose of maintaining opposing power, and does not occupy the defendant. Even if the defendant actually occupies it, it is persuasive in the defendant's assertion that it is not possessed by the defendant. Even if it is actually possessed by the defendant, it is not proven that the tenant's possession, i.e., the tenant's possession, is a separate independent possession exceeding C's possession, without any evidence. 3. As such, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow