logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.06.24 2019나4004
대여금등
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs a food rental business with the trade name of “C”.

B. On March 1, 2017, D entered into a contract with E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) for the construction of multi-household housing facilities on the F ground of Busan, Seo-gu, Busan, and E entered into a contract with G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) for the said construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) on the same day.

C. D completed the registration of initial ownership of the above ground building on September 26, 2017, after completion of the construction of the above new building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 10 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to set a rent of KRW 28,00,000 ( KRW 125,000 per square day x 224 square day) and lease a food house to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Plaintiff leased a food house to the Defendant.

Since G paid KRW 8,00,000,000 to the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the rent of KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff and the damages for delay.

B. The defendant's assertion that he was an employee of G as the field director, and the defendant concluded a contract for the rental of a house on behalf of G with the plaintiff, and it should be paid by G.

In addition, the food rental fee under the above contract is KRW 17,505,000 (Seoul 90,000 x 194).

3. The Defendant, after receiving a sub-subcontract from G, entered into a contract for rental with the Plaintiff after receiving a sub-subcontract for the instant construction project from G, is not in dispute between the parties, or can be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence No. 6, No. 1, and No. 4, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay a rent under a contract for rental with the Plaintiff.

Furthermore, with respect to rent and volume, Gap No. 3, Eul. B.

arrow