beta
Text
1. All claims filed by the plaintiff (appointed party) are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. A. Around April 2, 2008, E and Defendant B entered into a contract with Defendant B to lease the instant building by setting the deposit amount of KRW 23 million and the period from April 19, 2008 to April 18, 2010 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).
B. E was married on January 15, 1982 with F, but divorced on June 29, 1987.
Plaintiff
The designated children of E are children of E.
C. E died on April 26, 2015. From April 19, 2008 to April 19, 2008, E maintained de facto marital relations with Defendant C in the instant building and carried out community life.
Plaintiff
The designated parties are married to each other, and the designated parties are living in the city of Si.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, Eul's 1 and 2 (including Serial number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff and the designated party inherited the right to claim the return of the lease deposit against the Defendant B, and can seek the return of the lease deposit against the Defendant B, and can seek the delivery of the instant building against the Defendant C by subrogation, in order to preserve the right to claim the return of the lease deposit.
B. According to Article 9(2) of the Housing Lease Protection Act, a successor to the status of a lessor under the instant lease agreement provides, “If the heir does not live a family community life in the house at the time of the death of the lessee, the heir shall jointly succeed to the lessee’s rights and duties, with a person in a de facto marital relationship with which the family community life was living in the house in question and a relative within the second degree.” According to the above basic facts, it can be recognized that, at the time of the death of the lessee, the Plaintiff and the heir were living far away from E, and that Defendant C is a person in a de facto marital relationship with which the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff were living in the family community.”