beta
Text
At the same time, the Defendant received real estate stated in the separate sheet from the Plaintiffs, and simultaneously received each of the Plaintiffs, 154,000.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 30, 2018, the Plaintiffs entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant for the lease deposit of KRW 308,000,000 as well as for the term of contract from January 22, 2019 to January 21, 202 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with regard to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and completed the resident registration on January 29, 2019 after the full payment of the lease deposit.
B. As to the instant real estate on July 25, 2018, the registration of ownership transfer under D was completed on September 25, 2019 on the grounds of sale and purchase on July 25, 2019, and the right to collateral security was established with a maximum debt amount of KRW 180,000,000 on October 14, 2019.
C. On November 11, 2019, the Plaintiffs sent to the Defendant proof that D did not want to succeed to a lessor’s status under the instant lease agreement, and thus the Defendant terminated the instant lease agreement, and accordingly, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiffs a certificate of purporting to refund the lease deposit. The said proof reached the Defendant around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiffs' assertion raised an objection against the defendant to succeed to the status of a lessor under the instant lease agreement and notified the termination of the instant lease agreement, and thus, the defendant is obligated to return the lease deposit to the plaintiffs.
B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) Pursuant to Article 3(4) of the Housing Lease Protection Act, D succeeds to a lessor’s status under the instant lease agreement, thereby acquiring the obligation to return the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement as a discharge, and the Defendant does not bear the obligation to return the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement against the Plaintiffs. 2) The Defendant is the obligation to return the lease deposit under the instant lease agreement.