beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff’s obligation to refund deposit amounting to KRW 45,00,000 based on the lease agreement dated January 20, 2012 to Defendant F, and the Defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 4, 2016, at the request of H, the medical corporation, the Plaintiff’s creditor, the Busan District Court I, the Busan District Court I commenced the voluntary auction procedure (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).
B. In the instant auction procedure, Defendant 1, 2, and Defendant F (hereinafter “Defendant 3”) asserted that there was a claim for the return of the lease deposit, and filed a report on the right as a lessee and the demand for distribution as the lessee.
1) Defendant 1’s building in Busan-gu K (hereinafter “instant building”)
(2) Of the instant building, Defendant 3’s deposit amounting to KRW 45,00,00 for the five-story (three-story) among the instant buildings (one hundred thousand,00,000 based on a lease agreement concluded by September 30, 2013), KRW 45,00,00 for the lease agreement concluded by January 20, 2012 for the five-story housing (three-story), among the instant buildings (one hundred,000 for the lease agreement concluded by September 30, 203), Defendant 2: (a) KRW 70,00 for the deposit based on the lease agreement concluded by March 1, 203; (b) KRW 8; (c) evidence No. 9-1,2, and evidence No. 111; and (d) the purport of the entire pleadings; and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. The facts of Defendant 1 and 2 are as follows: (a) Defendant 1 and 2 did not claim against Defendant 1 and 2; (b) concluded a false lease agreement in collusion with M who are the former representative of the Plaintiff, even though they were not the tenants of the part 1,2, and 3 of the part 1,3 (intersections) and the part 4 of the Ldong from among the instant building; and (c) filed a report on the right as a lessee and a demand for distribution in
B) Even if Defendant 1 and 2 genuine lessee, Defendant 1 and 2 did not pay a long-term monthly rent to the Plaintiff and deducted the unpaid monthly rent from the deposit, and as such, Defendant 1 and 2 still filed a report on the right as a lessee and demand for distribution in the instant auction procedure as if the deposit remains in full. C) As such, Defendant 1 and 2 did not have any obligation to return the deposit against Defendant 1 and 2.