logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2021.01.13 2020가단2580
청구이의 등
Text

The defendant's Suwon District Court Decision 201Gadan 4740 decided January 30, 2020 against the plaintiff was based on the defendant's Suwon District Court Decision 4740 decided January 30.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 25, 2016, the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate owned by the Plaintiff to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 1.3 million, the lease period from February 18, 2016 to February 17, 2018.

B. After the termination of the above lease contract upon the expiration of the term, the Defendant brought an action against the Plaintiff seeking the return of the above lease deposit of KRW 1.3 million at the court level 4740,000,000. As a result, on January 30, 2020, the judgment was rendered that “the Plaintiff shall pay the above KRW 1.3 million to the Defendant” and became final and conclusive around that time (hereinafter “the final and conclusive judgment of this case”).

Based on the final judgment of the instant case, the Defendant filed a request for auction of the instant real estate to the Seoul Eastern District Court C, and the auction procedure was commenced on April 16, 2020.

(d)

Accordingly, on June 10, 2020, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 131,041,760,000, total of KRW 131,041,760,000 for the above lease deposit and auction procedure costs, on the condition that “the Plaintiff shall deliver the instant real estate to the consignee (the Plaintiff)” by the Seoul Eastern District Court No. 1820 in return for “the Plaintiff shall deliver the instant real estate to the consignee (the Plaintiff).”

E. The Defendant continues to occupy the instant real estate even after the termination of the above lease agreement.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Since a lessee’s duty to return the leased object and a lessor’s duty to return the deposit arising upon the termination of the lease contract upon the termination of the judgment on the cause of the claim are concurrently performed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da24424, 24231, Jul. 9, 2020). Thus, it is valid for the Plaintiff to deposit the lease deposit amount of KRW 130,000 in the Defendant’s future with the deposit of KRW 130,000,00,000, in return for the transfer of the

Therefore, the above lease deposit against the plaintiff of the defendant indicated in the final judgment of this case.

arrow