(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.06.13 2013나6729

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.06.13 2013나6729

임대보증금반환 등

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the cancellation part shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the facts of recognition are as stated in the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Determination

A. 1) On November 2, 2007, the Plaintiff concluded a sublease contract with the Defendant for the instant commercial building (hereinafter “instant sublease contract”) and paid KRW 30,000,000 to Nonparty F by means of remitting the sublease deposit to Nonparty F. Since the instant sublease contract was terminated on January 10, 2008 by expressing the intent to terminate the instant sublease contract to the Plaintiff on or around January 10, 2008, the Defendant is obligated to refund KRW 30,00,000 to the Plaintiff.

B) As alleged by the Plaintiff, the Defendant did not conclude the instant sub-lease contract as asserted by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff did not receive some (9 million won) of the deposit for the sub-lease under the sub-lease contract from F. However, the Plaintiff asserts that the said F would make a new contract and make a payment for the difference between the unpaid deposit and the unpaid deposit for the sub-lease, and that there is no fact that the Plaintiff received a sub-lease deposit under the instant sub-lease contract from the Plaintiff. 2) Therefore, the Plaintiff asserts that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence, which were established by the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded the sub-lease contract with respect to the commercial building of this case, are examined as follows: ① The instant contract made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is different from the contract for the sub-lease, the date of preparation, and the date of preparation, and the details thereof, especially until the end of the lease, and ② the Plaintiff paid the sub-lease deposit to the Defendant.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대법원 2016. 8. 29. 선고 2016다211156 판결

-부산지방법원 2017.02.15 2016나2304

-수원지방법원 2016.08.09 2015가단128574

-서울동부지방법원 2015.12.09 2015나23613

-서울동부지방법원 2015.12.09 2015나22337