logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.27 2017가단38224
보증금반환
Text

1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 68,884,214 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from January 29, 2010 to December 27, 2017.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 25, 2007, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with C, referred to as the Defendant’s agent, and with the terms of setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 105,000,000, and the lease period of KRW 2 years from August 29, 2007, which set the lease deposit amount of KRW 105,00,000, and the lease period of KRW 1903 (hereinafter “instant real property”).

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff received the instant real estate on August 29, 2007, and the Plaintiff received a fixed date in the lease agreement on the same day and received a move-in report.

B. From that time, the voluntary auction procedure (F) commenced with respect to the instant real estate, and the Plaintiff received dividends of KRW 36,115,786 as the lessee who obtained the fixed date on January 7, 2010.

C. After January 29, 2010, the Plaintiff transferred the instant real estate to a new purchaser on the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3, 5, 7 evidence, Eul 2-5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff (the summary of the claim for counterclaim) concluded the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff due to the voluntary auction procedure on the instant real estate. Since only KRW 36,115,786 out of the lease deposit 105,00,000 was recovered in the distribution procedure, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remaining lease deposit amount of KRW 68,884,214 and the delay damages therefor. 2) The Defendant (the summary of the claim for counterclaim)’s Dong C concluded the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff without the authority of the Defendant to act on behalf of the Defendant, this is null and void.

However, the Plaintiff received 36,115,786 won in the auction procedure for the instant real estate, which is acquired without any legal ground.

Meanwhile, in accordance with the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,00,000 to the Defendant, etc., and thus, the Plaintiff deducted KRW 10,000,000 from the amount paid at KRW 36,115,786 as dividends to the Defendant and the remainder of KRW 26,115,786.

arrow