logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.07.10 2019가단117698
임대차보증금
Text

1. As to the Plaintiff, Defendant B’s KRW 64,285,714; Defendant C and E respectively, KRW 42,857,142; and each of the said money from May 3, 2020.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 10, 2017, the deceased F (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on November 7, 2018.

On June 27, 2007, Defendant B inherited each deceased at the ratio of 3/7 as the wife of the deceased, and Defendant C and E inherited each deceased at the ratio of 2/7 between the deceased and the former wife.

B. On July 8, 2017, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement between Defendant B and the deceased on the lease of the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on the ownership of the deceased (hereinafter “instant real estate”) by setting the deposit amount of KRW 150 million and the period from August 11, 2017 to August 10, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. On August 8, 2017, the Plaintiff remitted down payment of KRW 15 million to the deceased’s account. On August 11, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the remainder KRW 135 million to Defendant B at the same time as the instant real estate was delivered.

The Plaintiff delivered the instant real estate to Defendant B on May 2, 2020, while the instant lawsuit was pending.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 3, 8, 9, Eul 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The conclusion of the instant lease agreement constitutes a juristic act between husband and wife on the part of the deceased, and thus, Defendant B has the authority to act on behalf of the deceased. Even if not, the Plaintiff is deemed to have justifiable grounds to believe that Defendant B had the authority to conclude the instant lease agreement on behalf of the deceased, so the expressive agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act is established. Therefore, the effect of the instant lease agreement is limited to the deceased. Therefore, Defendant B, who succeeded to the deceased, is liable to return the lease deposit to the Plaintiff. (2) Defendant B leased the instant real estate to the Plaintiff for the purpose of using the care expenses of the deceased, etc., and received from the Plaintiff.

arrow