logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.08.16 2016가단132014
임대차보증금
Text

1. The Defendants amounting to KRW 39,00,000, and to KRW 5% per annum from December 26, 2016 to December 29, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. (1) On November 8, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendants on the condition that “39,000,000 won for lease deposit, and the term of lease from November 10, 2013 to November 9, 2015,” with respect to the instant D Building 407 (hereinafter “instant real estate”). At that time, the Plaintiff paid the Defendants KRW 39,00,000 for lease deposit.

(2) On December 25, 2016, the Plaintiff delivered the instant real estate to the Defendants after the lease agreement term expires.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts, the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount of KRW 39,000,000,000 and damages for delay, unless there are special circumstances.

2. The Defendants asserted as to the Defendants’ assertion. The Defendants asserted that the third party who transferred the instant real estate from the Plaintiff out of the lease deposit to be paid set off the repair cost for the damaged portion while residing in the instant real estate. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit amounting to KRW 39,00,000 and damages for delay at each rate of KRW 5% per annum under the Civil Act from December 26, 2016 to December 29, 2016, which is the date following the date when the Plaintiff delivered the instant real estate to the Defendant, and KRW 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date when the copy of the instant complaint is delivered to the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is with merit, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow