1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is identical to the part against the defendant among the reasons stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments to the fifth and seventh of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this case shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Furthermore, if a housing lessee with opposing power as stipulated in Article 3 (1) of the Housing Lease Protection Act transfers the right of lease lawfully with the consent of the lessor, if the possession of the assignee is succeeded and the resident registration is severed within the period to the extent that it cannot be deemed that the said right of lease was severed, the possession and the resident registration was modified by the transfer of the right of lease.

Even if the opposing power of the lease originally owned by the lessee is not extinguished, it should continue to exist without maintaining the identity.

In such cases, the right of lease by the transfer of the right of lease is transferred to the transferee while maintaining its identity, and the original lessee withdraws from the lease relationship, so the transferee of the right of preferential payment can exercise the right of preferential payment owned by the original lessee under Article 3-2 (2) and Article 8 (1) of

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da101275 Decided June 10, 2010). However, as seen earlier, the term of the Defendant’s lease begins from the day following the F’s term of lease, and the same amount of the lease deposit should be substituted by F’s deposit as the same amount of the lease deposit. The lessor G explained that the lease agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant was due to F’s friendship with the Defendant that the Defendant had resided in the past. As such, the F’s right of lease can be deemed to have been transferred to the Defendant without maintaining the identity with the lessor’s consent.

Therefore, the above right of lease does not lose opposing power, and the defendant can exercise the right of preferential payment of F which is the existing lessee.

2. Conclusion, the plaintiff's defendant.