logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017.10.12 2017다224630
건물인도 등 청구의 소
Text

The judgment below

The part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) regarding the mid-term counterclaim is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Since the duty to return the leased object arising from the termination of the lease agreement and the duty to return the remainder after deducting the lessor’s overdue rent, etc. from the lessor’s repayment relationship, if the lessee continuously occupied the leased building by exercising his/her right of defense of simultaneous performance, the lessor performed the duty to return the deposit to the lessee.

Inasmuch as a lessee does not lose his/her right to defense of simultaneous performance due to such reasons as the lessee’s duty to specify the building is omitted due to the provision of performance or actual performance, possession of the lessee’s building cannot be deemed an illegal possession, and therefore, the lessee has no liability to compensate for such damage.

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Da14664 delivered on July 25, 1995, Supreme Court Decision 98Da6497 delivered on May 29, 1998, etc.). 2. The records reveal the following facts.

On November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) purchased a building of reinforced concrete structure 4th floor on the ground of Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, from new IMS Comprehensive Construction, and succeeded to a lease agreement on the instant building, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 11, 2015.

B. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) leased part of the second floor of the instant building (hereinafter “instant store”) before the Plaintiff purchased the instant building, and operated the party hall. However, the term of lease was expected to expire on December 31, 2015.

C. On November 23, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased the instant building, and on November 23, 2015, with the Defendant, transferred to the lessee the full amount of the deposit deposit (excluding the unpaid rental fee, restoration cost, water or mineral heat cost, and other unpaid money) with respect to the pre-sale agreement due to the sale and purchase of the instant real estate. The time limit for the transfer is until December 31, 2015.

arrow