logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.01.16 2012가단124504
임차료반환 등
Text

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

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part resulting from the participation.

Reasons

1. Presumed factual basis

A. On May 16, 2006, the non-party company (hereinafter "non-party company") entered into a contract to lease the building of this case with the non-party company's 50 square meters of the 1st floor of the 7th underground floor building on the non-party E and six lots of land owned by the defendants (hereinafter "the building of this case") from May 16, 2006 to May 15, 2009 (including value-added tax) with the lease deposit amount of 40 million won, monthly rent of 3.3 million won (hereinafter "the lease of this case"). Upon the consent of the defendants, the plaintiff who entered into the contract with the non-party company to sub-lease the building of this case with the non-party company from May 16, 2006 to May 15, 2009 to the sub-lease contract with the non-party company without the lease deposit of this case to the non-party company (hereinafter "non-party company's sub-lease contract").

B. At the time of the instant lease agreement, Defendant B issued a certificate of payment guarantee amounting to KRW 400 million from the Japanese bank on June 7, 2006 to secure the obligation to refund the above lease deposit against the non-party company, and issued it to the non-party company, and then renewed the guarantee guarantee period by March 21, 201. On March 16, 2011, Defendant B issued a guarantee certificate issued from the new bank up to March 16, 201, up to KRW 40 million and the guarantee period up to March 16, 2012. From that time, the Plaintiff, other than the Defendants, continued to pay KRW 34,179,097, a sum of the guarantee fees following the issuance of the said guarantee certificate until October 2011.

C. Around April 2010, the non-party company was determined as a company subject to business normalization due to the aggravation of financial situation, and at that time, it is a monthly difference from that time to the Defendants.

arrow