beta
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 September 3, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into and terminated the instant lease agreement. On September 3, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and Jung-gu, Seoul and the third floor D (hereinafter “instant apartment”).
(2) The term “lease agreement” refers to a lease agreement under the terms that the lease contract is leased from September 25, 2012 to September 24, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the term of KRW 215,00,000,00, and the term of lease.
(2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 215,00,000,000 on September 3, 2012, and KRW 204,00,000 on September 25, 2012 as lease deposit. (2) Although the instant lease contract had been extended temporarily after the expiration of the first period, the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not extend the period of time after the expiration of the first period, but rather agreed to terminate the contract on January 2015.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff transferred the amount of KRW 21,00,000 directly to the Defendant on January 12, 2015, to the Defendant through an account in the name of J, the mother of the Defendant on March 21, 2015, and KRW 27,00,000,000, totaling KRW 27,000,000, to the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement on the instant apartment between E and E on March 21, 2015. The Plaintiff transferred the amount of KRW 27,00,000 to the account in the name of J, the mother of the Defendant on March 21, 2015.
B returned as part of the lease deposit.
3) The Plaintiff intended to refund the remainder of the lease deposit to the Defendant with the deposit for lease that would be entitled to receive the lease of the instant apartment to E, but the lease contract with E was not effective because it did not cancel the registration of creation of a mortgage over the maximum debt amount of KRW 100,000,000, which was completed in the name of F, on the instant apartment. Accordingly, the Plaintiff could not refund the remainder of the lease deposit to the Defendant. (B) The auction procedure for the instant apartment 1) the Plaintiff, the mortgagee Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) (hereinafter “H”) (hereinafter “the auction procedure”), the Plaintiff, the mortgagee of the instant apartment, filed a voluntary auction with K with the Seoul Central District Court on September 4, 2017.