logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2020.11.18 2020가단78670
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 26, 2017, D entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s land and ground houses (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with respect to the amount of KRW 230,000,000,000, and the term of lease from September 19, 2017 to September 18, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and paid KRW 23,000,000 for the down payment.

B. At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, four joint collateral security measures were respectively set up with F land and joint collateral (a total of KRW 19,200,000, KRW 48,000,000 in total, KRW 72,000,000 in total, KRW 36,000,000 in total, KRW 36,000,000 in total, KRW 36,000 in total,00 in total, and KRW 36,000 in total,00 in each of the instant collective collateral security rights (hereinafter “instant

C. Prior to mediating the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, Defendant B was not aware that the instant real estate and the hanok residing in the Plaintiff was set up as a joint security.

When mediating the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, Defendant B explained that D was set up as a joint collateral for the instant right to collateral security at the location of the Plaintiff’s joint ownership at the time of entering into the lease agreement.

However, unlike the explanation, the above F land, which is the joint collateral property of the instant mortgage, was not worth being secured at 25 square meters on the road, and the above Han-dong Office explained as joint collateral by Defendant B, was located in Ilyang-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, which is adjacent to the instant real estate.

(Road Name Address is the current address of the plaintiff, Goyang-gu I, Goyang-gu, Goyang-gu.)

On September 15, 2017, D knew of the aforementioned circumstances, unlike the initial explanation, notified the Plaintiff of his intent to cancel or cancel the lease on the ground of the breach of the duty of disclosure on the ground that the value of the joint collateral was set higher than the value of the instant real estate than the value of the instant real estate.

E. D. The above cancellation or cancellation; or

arrow