(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.10.17 2018나2842

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) 서울북부지방법원 2019.10.17 2018나2842

임대차 계약에 의한 손해배상채권

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 18, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with D and E (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The Defendants are licensed real estate agents who arranged the instant lease agreement.

(2) The lease object of the lease of the Plaintiff: (a) lease of the Plaintiff; (b) lease of the Plaintiff; (c) lease of the Plaintiff; and (d) lease of the Plaintiff; (c) lease of the Plaintiff; and (d) lease of the Plaintiff: 120 million won; (c) lease of the entire third floor (hereinafter “the lease object of this case”);

b. The due date of the down payment is KRW 6 million and the intermediate payment is KRW 6 million, January 19, 2015, and the due date of the remainder is KRW 18 million on February 21, 2015: D and E: The due date for the lease of the Plaintiff: From February 21, 2015 to February 21, 2017: Paragraph (5) of the stipulation of the special contract from February 21, 2015 to February 21, 2017: to cancel the due date.

b)the lessor is to set aside a loan of the lease on a deposit basis;

B. At the time of the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, the instant real estate was jointly owned by D and E, respectively, and on December 26, 2014, the attachment registration of D’s co-ownership on the instant real estate was completed on December 26, 2014.

C. As to D’s share in the instant real estate, the registration of additional seizure of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “instant subsequent seizure”) was completed on January 26, 2015 after the conclusion of the instant lease agreement, and the registration of transfer of shares was completed in G due to public sale on November 16, 2015 after the Korea Asset Management Corporation’s public sale procedure was in progress.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendants did not cancel the contract under the terms and conditions agreed to in the instant lease agreement. However, even if it was anticipated that the subsequent attachment would be constituted, it was erroneous for the Defendants to conceal such circumstances to the Plaintiff and broker the instant lease agreement.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.01 2013가합47663

-수원지방법원안산지원 2015.04.24 2014가단114589

-서울북부지방법원 2019.06.11 2017가단113782

-서울남부지방법원 2015.09.17 2015나53617

-서울남부지방법원 2019.12.06 2018나69903