(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.04.30 2014가단34033

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) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.04.30 2014가단34033

채권양도의 의사진술 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion (the Plaintiff’s assertion as the head lessee) received dividends of KRW 22 million as a small lessee in the distribution procedure of the instant case (U.S. District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch B).

However, since the defendant is the most lessee who has not resided in the apartment of this case or paid the lease deposit, it is not entitled to receive dividends.

Therefore, the defendant, as a mortgagee, has a duty to transfer the bonds entered in the separate sheet to the plaintiff who is obligated to receive a dividend and notify the transfer thereof to the Republic of

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 3, there is no room to regard the defendant as the most lessee with only the form of tenant for the purpose of receiving dividends in the name of the lease deposit, as alleged by the plaintiff.

① The Defendant is a debtor on collateral security, and is the co-existence of C, who was the owner of the instant apartment.

② On September 6, 2013, which was four months after the date of a contract under the lease contract with C (on May 13, 2013), the Defendant completed the move-in report after obtaining a fixed date from September 6, 2013.

③ The Defendant did not submit sufficient data on the fact that 57 million won was paid under the above lease contract.

In addition, the above KRW 57 million is the amount that is too small to be the lease deposit in light of the market price of the apartment in this case.

B. However, taking account of the following circumstances, the aforementioned evidence and the evidence stated in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the circumstance stated in the foregoing paragraph (a) lacks to readily conclude that the Defendant is the most lessee and there is no other sufficient evidence to acknowledge it.

① As to the developments leading up to the conclusion of a lease agreement with C, the Defendant concluded a lease agreement with C on April 13, 2013 with the amount of KRW 50,77 million, instead of receiving the refund thereof, and concluded the lease agreement with the amount of KRW 57,00,000,000.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2014.04.16 2013가단91343

-전주지방법원군산지원 2014.11.28 2014가단7297

-인천지방법원부천지원 2016.11.23 2016가단101657

-서울북부지방법원 2017.08.18 2016가단13854

-광주지방법원순천지원 2015.04.22 2014가단22059