(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.04.18 2018나4725 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.04.18 2018나4725

건물명도 등

Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

Defendant B, the Plaintiff, and the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

Reasons

Basic Facts

Around February 2017, the Plaintiff leased real estate attached to D as “The lease period: from March 4, 2017 to March 3, 2018; deposit: KRW 500,000; and monthly rent: KRW 500,000.”

D Around the above time, with the consent of the Plaintiff, drafted a sub-lease contract with Defendant C, “The lease period: from March 1, 2017 to February 27, 2018; 1,000,000, monthly rent: 500,000 won” with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet with Defendant C.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant sub-lease contract”). The sub-lease column of the said sub-lease contract contains the address, resident registration number, telephone number, and name of the Defendant B, and the name of the Defendant B is indicated as the “Defendant C (party)” under the name of the Defendant B, and signed “B” in the column of the Defendant C’s seal.

Defendant C is the mother of Defendant B.

The Defendants, from July 2017 to January 22, 2019, failed to pay rent. The Plaintiff, on behalf of the Defendants, paid the management expenses of KRW 512,530 on February 9, 2018, and KRW 70,310 on February 14, 2018.

On January 22, 2018, a duplicate of the complaint of this case, stating the Plaintiff’s intention to terminate the lease agreement, was served on Defendant B.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings as a whole, defendant C asserts that the plaintiff's claim against defendant C should be dismissed, since it is not a party to the sub-lease contract of this case, and there is no standing to be a party.

However, in a lawsuit for performance, since a person who asserts himself/herself as the person entitled to demand performance has standing to sue and has the standing to sue as the person who is asserted by him/her as the person liable to perform performance, the existence of standing to sue is attributable to the plaintiff's assertion itself (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da14797, Jun. 14, 1994). As long as the plaintiff asserts that he/she is the former lessee and seeks payment of the delivery of the real estate of this case to the defendant C

참조판례

-대법원 1994. 6. 14. 선고 94다14797 판결

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2018.11.02 2017가단523493

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.05.08 2014가단36927

-서울북부지방법원 2018.07.13 2018가단2148

-인천지방법원 2017.10.18 2016가단247758

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.06.12 2019가단5008729