logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.27 2019가단5154776
임대차보증금반환 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the owner of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Type 10 D (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On October 11, 2016, the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 130 million from October 11, 2016 to August 24, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”), and thereafter, paid the lease deposit to E.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 6, testimony of witness E and the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant conferred the right to represent the conclusion of the comprehensive lease agreement on the real estate of this case to E. Accordingly, the plaintiff concluded the lease agreement with E representing the defendant and paid the lease deposit. Thus, the lease agreement becomes effective to the defendant, who is the principal.

Even if it is not so, the Defendant granted E the fundamental right to enter into a monthly rental agreement with respect to the instant real estate at least. At the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff, has a justifiable reason to believe that E was granted the right to represent the conclusion of the instant lease agreement with the Defendant, and thus, constitutes an expression agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act.

On the other hand, the lease contract of this case is required to leave by the defendant

Since the Plaintiff delivered the instant real estate to the Defendant on November 15, 2018, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the lease deposit amount of KRW 130 million and the delay damages therefrom upon the termination of the instant lease agreement.

B. First of all, we examine the allegation on the right of representation.

The Defendant conferred to E the right of representation to conclude a comprehensive lease agreement including the instant lease agreement with respect to the instant real estate.

arrow