Where co-owners of a building jointly lease the building and receive security deposit, the nature of the obligation to return security deposit (=an obligation to pay security deposit)

Where co-owners of a building jointly lease a building and receive a security deposit, such lease does not lease their own shares, but jointly lease the object of lease as many parties, and the obligation to return the security deposit shall be regarded as an indivisible obligation due to its nature.

Articles 263, 265, 411, and 618 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 92Nu2202 delivered on September 22, 1992 (Gong1992, 3016) Supreme Court Decision 90Da13628 delivered on October 27, 1992 (Gong1992, 3232) Supreme Court Decision 97Da7356 delivered on May 16, 1997 (Gong197Ha, 1840)

Plaintiff

Incheon Development Co., Ltd. (Attorney Cho Young-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Busan District Court Decision 97Na13310 delivered on July 24, 1998

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Where co-owners of a building jointly lease a building and receive a security deposit, such lease does not lease their own shares, but jointly lease the leased object as many parties, and the obligation to return the security deposit shall be regarded as an indivisible obligation due to its nature. The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no violation of law such as the paper.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Justice)