logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.10.18 2015나21353
배당이의
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 20, 2009, D entered into a lease agreement with the Korea National Housing Corporation (the Korea Land and Housing Corporation was merged with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation; hereinafter “Korea Land and Housing Corporation”) under which the lease deposit amount of KRW 52,00,000 (the lease deposit amount of KRW 10,400,000 is each paid before the occupancy date), and monthly rent of KRW 390,000,00 with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 1203,201 (hereinafter “the instant rental house”).

This case's rental housing is prohibited from being able to reside in the rental housing for 10-year rental housing leased by the non-party Corporation pursuant to the Rental Housing Act, and the lessee has to reside in the rental housing for 10-year rental housing.

B. On May 3, 2011, F entered into a sublease contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sublease contract”) which subleases the instant rental housing amounting to KRW 80 million and the contract period from May 30, 201 to KRW 24 months (hereinafter “instant sublease contract”).

The lessor of the instant sub-lease contract refers to the lessor of the instant sub-lease contract in which the identity of D is stated, his/her door is sealed, and the Plaintiff’s name is indicated as his/her agent.

In addition, the terms and conditions of the special agreement are “1.10 public rental housing in the form of mutual recognition;

2. The deposit for lease on a deposit basis shall be notarized.

(that the portion to be named is a condition to be notarized);

4. To enter into a contract on behalf of the lessor;

(H : F);

5. A (Plaintiff) and I’s real resident registration number shall be the case of a notarial deed.

6. The phrase “a condition that does not file a move-in report.” (c) The Defendant states that a notary public does not immediately enforce compulsory execution if the payment of a promissory note, which was made by the Plaintiff and the payee (creditor) and the Defendant, is delayed, on June 1, 201, by stating that the law firm’s rate is KRW 80 million, the issue date is May 31, 201, the issue date is May 31, 201, and the issue date is May 30, 2013: the issuer (debtor): the Plaintiff and the Defendant (creditor).

arrow