(영문) 창원지방법원마산지원 2019.05.30 2018가단6863

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) 창원지방법원마산지원 2019.05.30 2018가단6863

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On February 20, 2014, the owner of the instant real estate, F, the owner of the Esing shop located in Changwon-si, Changwon-si C, and Domotoir (hereinafter “instant real estate”) was leased the instant real estate to the Defendant. The Defendant leased the instant real estate to G (former name: H). Since G leased the instant real estate with the Defendant’s permission, the Plaintiff related to the instant real estate, as the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate to the Plaintiff with the Defendant’s permission, is the lessee to the Defendant (i.e.,, the Defendant, the lessee, and the Plaintiff).

However, the plaintiff suffered damages due to the defect of the real estate in this case, and the defendant, the lessor of the real estate in this case, is liable for the damages to the former lessee.

The Plaintiff is a lessor of the instant real estate in the complaint. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff is a lessee, and the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff is a lessor on April 3, 2019, and the Plaintiff is a lessor, a lessee, and a lessee.

2. The judgment of the court below is based on the premise that even if the lessor consented to the sub-lease of real estate, direct legal relations between the lessor and the sub-lessee does not occur (Article 630, 631, 644, and 647 of the Civil Act exceptionally prescribes the rights and obligations between the lessor and the sub-lessee, but there is no provision on the claim for damages between the lessor and the sub-lessee, and even based on the legal relations under the above provisions, it is difficult to view that the plaintiff's claim for damages against the lessor, as alleged by the sub-lessee, may arise). The plaintiff's assertion is without merit, without examining further grounds, on the premise that the plaintiff, the sub-lessee, can claim damages against the Defendant, the lessor

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.

참조조문

유사 판례

-대법원 2018. 7. 11. 선고 2018다200518 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.03 2017나49203

-인천지방법원 2017.12.15 2016가단249303

-대법원 2018.07.11 2018다200518

-대법원 1995. 12. 12. 선고 95다23996 판결