logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.06.22 2017가단110500
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B’s KRW 55,00,000 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 21, 2018 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 7, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B as the broker of D, a licensed real estate agent, for the lease deposit amounting to KRW 55 million, and for the lease deposit period from April 9, 2016 to April 9, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The Plaintiff paid KRW 55 million to Defendant B the lease deposit amount (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The lease agreement was concluded between Defendant B, which was located in the king-si building (F, the first and second class neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants, reading rooms, and council members) of the fifth class above ground, but at least 80 households’ houses, commercial stores, etc.

B. On April 9, 2016, the Plaintiff moved in the foregoing G subparagraph, and completed the move-in report on May 4, 2016, and received the fixed date.

C. At the time of the Plaintiff’s conclusion of the instant lease agreement, 2.6 billion won in total (i.e., KRW 650 million in total) of the maximum debt amount (i.e., KRW 1.., KRW 650 million in total) and 515 million in total (i.e., KRW 45 million in total as KRW 45 million in KRW 45 million in KRW 45 million in KRW 30 million in KRW 550 million in KRW 65 million in KRW 60 million in KRW 60 million in total) and 10 million in registration of the establishment of chonsegwon was completed.

D At the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, D explained the details of the establishment of a right to collateral security and a right to lease on a deposit basis on the instant building to the Plaintiff, but did not explain the amount of the deposit and priority of the lease agreement or the lease agreement that was not publicly notified by other units of the instant building.

D이 이 사건 임대차계약 체결 당시 작성하여 원고에게 교부한 중개대상물 확인설명서에는 「① 건축물 대장상 위반건축물 여부」란에 “적법”으로 표시되어 있고, 「⑨ 실제 권리관계 또는 공시되지 않은 물건의 권리 사항」란에 아무런 기재가 되어 있지 않았다.

(e) Thereafter, at the request of HFF, May 3, 2016.

arrow