logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.12.15 2017가합794
임대차보증금
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to receive real estate stated in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff at the same time.

Reasons

1. Basic facts: (a) on December 18, 2014, the Plaintiff leased (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from Defendant B and Defendant B, with the lease deposit KRW 210,000,000, and the lease period from February 10, 2015 to February 10, 2017.

The plaintiff paid a lease deposit to the defendant B, and received the delivery of the apartment of this case.

② On February 17, 2017, when the Plaintiff demanded the return of the lease deposit due to the expiration of the lease term of this case, Defendant B’s husband C prepared a written confirmation to the Plaintiff on February 17, 2017 that the Plaintiff will be liable for the total amount of damages if damage was incurred to the lease deposit (hereinafter “instant written confirmation”).

③ The Plaintiff continued to reside in the instant apartment from the date of delivery to the date of closing argument.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the fact-finding on the cause of the claim, the instant lease agreement was terminated on February 10, 2017.

After the expiration of the term of lease in accordance with each of the instant agreements, Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation to return the lease deposit to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, Defendant B and Defendant C, a lessor, are jointly and severally liable to return KRW 210,000,000 to the Plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

On the other hand, the plaintiff also claims damages for delay from the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint.

Therefore, the Plaintiff (the Defendant C is the husband of Defendant B, and as the husband of the Defendant C is the same with the Defendant B, and therefore, it is reasonable to determine the same status as the joint lessor) performed the duty of delivering apartment units, which are one’s own obligations under the simultaneous performance relationship upon the termination of the lease agreement, or offered lawful performance, thereby returning the leased deposit by the Defendants.

arrow