(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.06 2015나34243

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.06 2015나34243

상가전대차보증금등

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that on November 20, 2009, the Plaintiff leased the Defendant, who leased Suwon-si C 102 Dong C104 on November 20, 2009, 5 million won of the sub-lease deposit and 1.2 million won of the rent per month.

(hereinafter “The instant sublease contract”). Around March 23, 2010, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of his intention to terminate the instant sublease contract, as the Plaintiff was unable to use or benefit from the building due to the Defendant’s failure to obtain the lessor’s consent to the instant sublease contract, and thus, the instant sublease contract was terminated at that time, the Defendant is obligated to return five million won of the deposit for sublease to the Plaintiff.

B. According to the statements in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 3, it is recognized that the contract of the instant sub-lease has the defendant's signature and seal affixed, and the lease contract written in the defendant's name is attached.

However, there is no dispute over the fact that the Plaintiff signed the instant sub-lease contract with the Defendant’s husband D representing the Defendant. However, in light of the fact that D did not submit evidence such as power of delegation, etc. that could have known that D had been delegated the authority to conclude the instant sub-lease contract from the Defendant, it is insufficient to deem that D had the authority to conclude the instant sub-lease contract, and further, it is difficult to deem that D had justifiable grounds to believe that D had the authority to conclude the instant sub-lease contract.

(A) The Plaintiff asserted that D had the Defendant’s resident registration certificate at the time of entering into the instant sub-lease contract, but there is no evidence supporting the said assertion, and it is difficult to deem that there was a justifiable ground to the Plaintiff solely on the said circumstances). Therefore, the Plaintiff cannot assert the validity of the instant sub-lease contract to the Defendant.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim should be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance differs from this.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.05.31 2017가단521795

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.22 2015가단5312703

-수원지방법원 2020.06.18 2019나80350

-부산지방법원 2016.12.27 2016가단338729

-수원지방법원 2019.05.01 2018가단543556