(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.12.21 2017나3257 | 리걸엔진

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) 창원지방법원 2017.12.21 2017나3257

임대차보증금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 20, 201, the Plaintiff (formerly: D) entered into a lease agreement with the owner of the foregoing building on the second floor of the E-ground building (hereinafter “instant building”) for KRW 15 million, monthly rent, KRW 300,000,000, and KRW 15 million,000,000,000 from May 31, 201 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and paid KRW 15 million to F.

B. On January 20, 2012, F sold the instant building to the Defendants, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 20, 2012.

The Defendants succeeded to a lessor’s status under the instant lease agreement. On May 31, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendants decided to increase the monthly rent by KRW 330,000,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, and 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendants succeeded to the lessor’s status pursuant to Article 3(2) of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act while purchasing the instant building from F. The Plaintiff terminated the instant lease agreement and delivered the instant building to the Defendants on October 31, 2013. As such, the Defendants are obligated to return the lease deposit amount of KRW 15 million to the Plaintiff. (2) At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement by the Defendants’ assertion, G, the representative director of the Plaintiff, at the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, notified the termination of the instant lease agreement on February 2, 2014, and deliver the instant building to the Defendants around that time. The Defendants returned the said G on February 3, 2014, the remainder after deducting overdue rent of KRW 13,79,000,000 deducted from the lease deposit of KRW 15 million. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit.

B. According to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 7, and the whole pleadings, this case’s assertion is examined.

참조조문

-상가건물 임대차보호법 제3조 제2항

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.09.07 2016나4899

-춘천지방법원 2018.06.19 2017가단5085

-서울서부지방법원 2016.02.17 2015가단10496

-대구지방법원 2018.05.01 2017가단122663

-수원지방법원 2019.05.16 2019가단501733