logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 제천지원 2018.08.08 2017가단21936
임대차보증금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay 75,000,000 won to the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Indication of claim;

A. On October 20, 201, the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate from the Defendant and D as “75,000,000 won for lease deposit, and two years for lease,” which are co-owners of the land and buildings located in Seocheon-si C (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

The plaintiff paid the above lease deposit to the defendant around that time.

B. The above lease contract was terminated upon the expiration of the term.

C. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit KRW 75,000,000 and the delay damages.

Where co-owners of a building jointly lease a building and receive a security deposit, such lease shall not be leased to each party, except in extenuating circumstances, but jointly leased the leased object as a number of parties, and the obligation to return the security deposit shall be deemed as an indivisible obligation in its nature.

(2) Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act (by service by public notice) applies to the case on December 8, 1998

3. In addition to claiming the return of KRW 75,00,000,000 against the Defendant, a lessor of the instant real estate, the Plaintiff partly dismissed part claimed damages for delay calculated by 15% per annum from the day after the delivery of the copy of the instant complaint to the day of full payment.

Where both obligations are simultaneously performed in a bilateral contract, even if one of the parties’ obligations becomes due, it shall not be liable for the delay of performance until the other party’s obligation is performed, even if the other party’s obligation is performed. Such effect does not necessarily lead to the exercise of the right of defense for simultaneous performance by the claimant who is not liable for the delay of performance.

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da54604, 54611 delivered on March 13, 1998). The Plaintiff is performing the Plaintiff’s obligation to deliver the instant real estate, which is simultaneously performed with the Defendant’s obligation to return the lease deposit.

arrow