(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2017.06.02 2016가단219876

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) 수원지방법원성남지원 2017.06.02 2016가단219876

계약금 반환 등

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from August 26, 2016 to June 2, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 10, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant stating that “200,000,000 won (20,000 among them) shall be paid at the time of the contract, and the remainder of KRW 180,00,000 shall be paid at the time of the contract, and the term of lease shall be from July 14, 2016 to July 13, 2018” (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. On June 10, 2016, the date of the contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a written contract at the office of the Defendant D, a licensed real estate agent.

C. After the preparation of the contract, the Plaintiff would pay KRW 100,000,000 out of the deposit as a deposit for a deposit, and the Defendant asked what is the loan for a deposit for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan for a loan. D

In the first color, the Defendant stated that “I wish to know annoying person,” and D stated that “I wish to agree to the fact of concluding a lease contract and the loan procedure at the bank granting the deposit, not to allow the lessor to see the bank or to establish a pledge on the deposit, or to any complicated procedure, but to consent to the fact of concluding the lease contract and the loan procedure.”

Accordingly, the defendant was known to "Ild" and "Ild".

On June 10, 2016, the date of the contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant issued a receipt.

E. Since then, the Plaintiff took the procedure for lending security deposit in the school curriculum, notified the Defendant of the fact that the telephone content was recorded by telephone, and confirmed the fact of the lease. Furthermore, after the termination of the lease contract, the Plaintiff asked whether he/she consented thereto.

The defendant shall consent to the fact that he shall return the teaching life, which is not the lessee, and the answer shall be recorded.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2018.09.21 2017가합107248

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.05 2016가단5259380

-대전지방법원서산지원 2019.06.04 2018가단4279

-서울동부지방법원 2019.06.07 2018나2150

-대구지방법원 2018.01.11 2017가단11657