logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.12.17 2020나52532
배당이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is 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. The ground for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified even if each evidence submitted to the court of first instance was presented to this court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for the following dismissal or addition, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

From the second to the second, the third to the sixth is as follows.

“A. The Defendant, on June 21, 2013, issued D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant house”) from K Co., Ltd. to the Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si.

) The lease deposit was leased between KRW 170,00,000, and the period from July 30, 2013 to July 30, 2015. The said lease was renewed once, and the period was extended to July 30, 2017. Meanwhile, on July 30, 2013, the Defendant transferred the instant house and completed a move-in report after acquiring the ownership of the instant house, and the F succeeded to the lessor’s status of the instant house on January 12, 2016 (hereinafter “instant lease”).

6) The following is added to the first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment.

As long as “(the Plaintiff) informed F and new lessee of the entrance h’s password, and thereafter F and H freely enter the instant house using the above password, the Defendant’s assertion that the possession of the instant house ought to be deemed lost.

However, the defendant seems to have known only the password without possessing the electronic key of the instant house. The reason why the defendant informed of the password seems to have seen the instant house in order to become a new lessee.

arrow