beta
Text
Defendant C shall deliver to Defendant D the real estate listed in the attached list.
Defendant D shall set forth in the above 1. Paragraph from Defendant C.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 9, 2017, Defendant D leased (hereinafter “instant lease”) real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) to Defendant C as KRW 25,00,000, KRW 1,150,000 per month of rent, and KRW 1,150,000 per month of rent, from June 30, 2017 to June 29, 2019.
B. On August 2, 2017, Defendant C borrowed KRW 9,000,000 from the Plaintiff, and around that time, from Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”), KRW 9,000,000, respectively, and on August 2, 2017, Defendant C transferred the lease deposit of this case to the Plaintiff and Nonparty Company KRW 18,000,000 (each of KRW 9,00,000 to the Plaintiff and Nonparty Company) and delegated the right to notify the assignment of claims to the Nonparty Company.
C. On April 13, 2018, the non-party company sent to Defendant D the fact that the Plaintiff and the non-party company received KRW 18,000,000 out of the lease deposit of this case from Defendant C by means of a certified fixed-date document, and the above notification of transfer reached Defendant D on April 18, 2018.
As of October 31, 2020, Defendant C did not pay KRW 14,900,000 for rent set forth in the instant lease agreement, and KRW 1,000,000 for the management expenses of the instant apartment.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 (including provisional number), purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts acknowledged earlier, Defendant D was notified of the transfer of the instant lease deposit from the non-party company on April 18, 2018, and the period of the instant lease contract expires on June 29, 2019 thereafter, the Plaintiff, as the transferee of the instant lease deposit, may request the Defendant C to deliver the instant apartment by subrogation on behalf of the Defendant D.
B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu4253, 4260, Apr. 25, 1989).
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff asserted that Defendant D had a duty to pay KRW 9,00,000 to the Plaintiff at the same time with the delivery of the instant apartment from Defendant C, and Defendant D had a duty to pay the instant apartment from the instant lease deposit to the completion date of delivery of the instant apartment.