(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.10.12 2016가단503805

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) 광주지방법원 2016.10.12 2016가단503805

임차권부존재확인

Text

1. As to the real estate listed in the attached list, there is no right of lease of the defendant under the lease agreement dated June 27, 2012.

Reasons

1. Facts of premise;

A. On August 12, 2011, the Defendant acquired the instant house indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant house”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale to a limited liability company B (hereinafter “non-party company”) on June 27, 2012.

B. On June 29, 2012, Nonparty Company completed the registration of the establishment of a new bank, which is the debtor company, the mortgagee company, the mortgagee company, the mortgagee company, and the new bank.

C. On June 19, 2015, the New Bank Co., Ltd. applied for a voluntary auction on the instant housing and commenced the procedure of the voluntary auction of real estate to Gwangju District Court C upon the voluntary auction decision.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). D.

On June 2, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired a claim against the non-party company from the new bank Co., Ltd. and succeeded to the status of the holder of the right to request auction.

E. In the instant auction procedure, the Defendant filed an application for a report on the right of lease and a demand for distribution on September 30, 2015, by asserting the right of lease under a lease agreement of KRW 220,000,000, which was concluded on June 27, 2012 between the Defendant and the Nonparty Company regarding the instant housing (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

[Evidence Evidence] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff in collusion with the non-party company claimed the right to lease the housing of this case with the intent to gain profit in the auction procedure of this case, although the defendant did not have the right to lease the housing of this case, while the defendant asserted that the non-party company had the claim of KRW 220,000,000 against the non-party company, and that the non-party company leased the housing of this case of this case of KRW 220,00,000 from the non-party company.

B. In a passive confirmation lawsuit, the Plaintiff’s claim is first specified and the cause of the right arises.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2015.09.16 2014가단116455

-부산지방법원동부지원 2015.12.17 2015가단205910

-서울동부지방법원 2017.12.01 2017가단102410

-의정부지방법원 2015.11.05 2015나541

-수원지방법원 2015.10.20 2015가단15364