beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 103,33,540 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from September 2, 2013 to July 18, 2014.
Reasons
1. Presumed factual basis
A. On June 25, 2007, D agreed that the building listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) shall be leased from E, the owner of which was KRW 24 months from November 1, 2007, KRW 130,000 from the lease term, KRW 130,000,00, and the payment of the deposit shall be substituted by the loan claim of KRW 130,000,00, which had been against E.
(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). D, on November 1, 2007, completed a move-in report on November 13, 2007, on the delivery of the said building from a policeman E.
B. On December 7, 2007, on the instant building, the establishment registration of the mortgage was completed with respect to the instant building at KRW 404,400,000, the amount of the credit union, the debtor, the maximum debt amount, and the maximum debt amount.
C. On April 14, 2009, the Lanpym Credit Union filed a request for auction of the building of this case with the Jung-gu District Court F, and the above court decided to commence auction on April 15, 2009. The defendant was awarded a successful bid of the above building at the above auction procedure and paid the price on March 30, 201, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of the defendant.
Based on the ownership of the building of this case, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Deceased and his children G (hereinafter “the Deceased, etc.”) who resided in the building of this case as the District Court Decision 2011Kadan29604, and the Deceased, etc. asserted that he was entitled to occupy the building as the lessee under the lease contract of this case.
On November 29, 2011, the above court rendered a favorable judgment against the defendant (the plaintiff in the lawsuit) by rejecting the defense of the deceased, etc., but the deceased, etc. appealed as the above court 2012Na786.
The above court accepted the defense of the deceased, etc. on October 18, 2012, and the tenant, etc. who concluded the lease contract in this case with E, and the defendant succeeded to the status of E in accordance with the Housing Lease Protection Act, on the ground that the deceased, etc. was entitled to possess the building.