beta
Text
1. The appeal filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim filed at the trial.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 1, 2008, the Defendant entered into a contract with D to lease two floors (hereinafter “instant building”) from among the buildings listed in the attached list, and occupied and used them from that time.
(The above lease agreement was finally renewed on May 1, 2014. (2 years)
The Plaintiffs: (a) purchased the instant building at the auction on July 22, 2015 and completed the registration of ownership transfer as to each 1/2 shares on July 24, 2015, at the Daegu District Court, which was the first secured mortgage on the buildings listed in the attached list, requested by the Squa Credit Union.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1 (including a lot number, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the main claim
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver it to the plaintiffs, who are the owner of the building of this case, unless there are special circumstances.
B. As to the judgment on the defendant's right of retention defense, the defendant asserted that the defendant can exercise the right of retention on the building of this case until he redeems the repair cost and the purchase cost of equipment of this case, since fire occurred in the building of this case around November 26, 2010 with the line of an old electric wire, and the defendant repaired the building of this case with KRW 29,668,00 and purchased equipment of KRW 52,07,000.
According to the records in Eul evidence No. 2, the fact that fire occurred on November 26, 2010 in the buildings listed in the attached Table, including the building of this case, is recognized.
However, the following circumstances, i.e., evidence that the Defendant paid repair costs and supplies, as shown in the evidence Nos. 4 through 6, and the witness E of the first instance trial, based on the overall purport of the pleadings, are revealed in the above evidence and the statement No. 3, i.e., evidence that the Defendant spent repair costs.