(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.04.18 2016나35479

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) 서울서부지방법원 2017.04.18 2016나35479

대위변제금등

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

Reasons

(The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be deemed to be combined)

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s mother-friendly network D (hereinafter “the network”) is the owner of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Building C and No. 502 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”). On July 28, 2012, the Plaintiff, a licensed real estate agent, delegated all acts and authority regarding the said real estate lease agreement to the Plaintiff.

B. On July 30, 2012, the Plaintiff, on behalf of the Deceased, managed the lease and the principal and interest of the instant real estate to E, by setting the lease deposit of the instant real estate as KRW 20,00,000, monthly rent of KRW 400,000, and the lease period as from August 16, 2012 to August 15, 2014. The Plaintiff, upon receiving the instant real estate from E, repaid the interest on the loans offered as security and handled various business related to the lease.

C. During that period, the Deceased died on or around December 2013, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant on June 27, 2014 due to the consultation division.

E was unable to recover the lease deposit even after the expiration of the lease contract, and the Seoul Western District Court 2014Kao1403 applied for the order of lease registration. Accordingly, on October 2, 2014, the lease registration was made on the above real estate.

E. On January 20, 2015, without the Defendant’s consent, the Plaintiff: (a) leased the instant real estate to F with the lease deposit of KRW 20,00,000; (b) monthly rent of KRW 400,00; and (c) from February 5, 2015 to February 4, 2017; (b) settled the lease deposit with E with the lease deposit received from F; and (c) cancelled the said lease registration order.

F. However, there was a dispute, such as the Defendant’s assertion that the right to lease the instant real estate cannot be acknowledged to F. The Plaintiff settled and returned the lease deposit to F around November 16, 2015.

G. On the other hand, the defendant is a fund for purchasing two row houses.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원포항지원 2017.10.31 2015가단10705

-춘천지방법원 2020.10.13 2020가단50818

-수원지방법원 2015.04.30 2014나35836

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.23 2013가단297027

-울산지방법원 2019.06.13 2018나24028