logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2015.04.14 2014가단20365
배당이의
Text

1. The Busan District Court prepared on September 16, 2014 with respect to the auction case of the real estate B located in the Dong branch of Busan District Court.

Reasons

According to the reasoning of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including each number), and Eul’s testimony and pleading as a witness, the plaintiff set the right to collateral security of KRW 72 million with respect to the building E, Busan-gun, Busan-gun, Inc. (hereinafter “instant building”) owned as collateral against D on February 14, 2012. The defendant set up a lease contract of KRW 14 million with respect to the instant building on April 26, 2012 to C who newly constructed and manages the instant building, and obtained a fixed date after setting up a lease contract of KRW 14 million with respect to the instant building, and completed the move-in report on April 30, 2012, the plaintiff completed the move-in report with respect to the instant building on November 4, 2013 with respect to the distribution schedule of KRW 14 million with the Busan-dong District Court’s dividends of KRW 84 million as the lessee’s dividends of the instant building.

However, the legislative purpose of the Housing Lease Protection Act is to ensure the stability of the residential life of citizens by prescribing special cases for the Civil Act concerning residential buildings, and Article 8 (1) of the Housing Lease Protection Act provides that the lessee may be paid a certain amount of the security deposit in preference to other security right holders in the case of small-sum lessee, even if the security deposit is small-sum lessee, it is a large property, and thus, it is reasonable to guarantee the recovery of the security deposit even if the status of other security right holders is harmed at least in the case of small-sum lessee, and it is an exception to the general provisions of the Civil Act. In light of such legislative purpose and purpose of the system, even if the obligee entered into a lease contract with the debtor with respect to the housing owned by the debtor and entered into the move-in report

arrow