logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1998. 4. 10. 선고 98다3276 판결
[전세보증금반환][공1998.5.15.(58),1309]
Main Issues

Whether a successful bidder of a leased house constitutes "the transferee of the leased house" under Article 3 (2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act (negative)

Summary of Judgment

In light of the provisions of Articles 1 and 2 of the Housing Lease Protection Act, a transferee of a leased house who is deemed to succeed to the status of a lessor as stipulated in Article 3(2) of the said Act refers to a transferee of a residential building which is the object of lease, and even if Article 3-2(1) of the said Act recognizes the lessee who meets the requirements for counterclaim as having the right to preferential reimbursement from the proceeds from the sale of the leased house site by auction or public sale, the successful bidder cannot be deemed the transferee of the leased house as mentioned above.

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 3 (2) and 3-2 (1) of the Housing Lease Protection Act

Plaintiff, Appellant

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant, Appellee

Defendant

Intervenor joining the Intervenor

Intervenor joining the Intervenor

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul District Court Decision 97Na38953 delivered on December 2, 1997

Text

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

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the provisions of Articles 1 and 2 of the Housing Lease Protection Act, a transferee of a leased house who is deemed to succeed to the status of a lessor under Article 3(2) of the said Act refers to a transferee of a residential building which is the object of lease, and even if Article 3-2(1) of the said Act recognizes the lessee who meets the requirements for counterclaim under the said Act the right to preferential reimbursement from the proceeds of realizing the leased house from the sale of the leased house by auction or public sale, the successful bidder cannot be deemed the transferee of the leased house as mentioned above.

The ground of appeal that the court below erred in the incomplete hearing on the premise of a different view is not accepted.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and the costs of appeal shall be assessed against the plaintiff who is the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Jeong Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울지방법원 1997.12.2.선고 97나38953