logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.12 2015나29960
손해배상등
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants exceeding the money ordered to be paid under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff, a real estate broker, leased 303 units (hereinafter “instant 303 units”) among the 4th floor multi-family houses on the K ground (hereinafter “instant multi-family houses”) owned by the Plaintiff as the broker of Defendant D, as follows. Defendant D is a real estate broker operating the F Licensed Real Estate Agents’ Office located in Asan City E, and Defendant Licensed Real Estate Agents Association (hereinafter “Defendant Association”) is a mutual aid contractor who entered into a mutual aid agreement within the limit of 100,000,000 won to cover liability for damages caused by Defendant D and real estate brokerage.

B. On March 23, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with Defendant D’s agent, a real estate broker, to lease the instant No. 303, supra, by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 65,00,000, and the contract term from April 20, 2013 to April 19, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. At the time of the instant lease agreement, with respect to the building of the instant multi-family house and the land that is the site thereof, the Daejeon Chungcheongnamnam Livestock Cooperative (hereinafter “YY”) had already been established as the right to collateral security (hereinafter “mortgage”) of 276,00,000 with the maximum debt amount of 276,00,000 won. U, T, S, Q, P, and N had some of the lease deposit amount of KRW 30,000,000, KRW 55,000,000, KRW 48,000,000, KRW 30,000,000, KRW 30,000,000, KRW 48,000,000, KRW 48,000,000, and KRW 00,000, respectively, and had already satisfied the requirements for counterclaim under Articles 3 and 4 of the Housing Lease Protection Act.

At the time of the instant lease agreement, Defendant D notified the Plaintiff of the maximum debt amount regarding the instant right to collateral security, which was entered in the instant multi-family house and the real estate registration register of the land, and indicated in the description of confirmation of the object to be mediated. However, whether other lessee exists in the instant building, and the amount of the lease deposit.

arrow