logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원목포지원 2017.05.31 2016가단1609 (1)
임대차보증금
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. On August 5, 199, Plaintiff A and the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, setting the deposit amount of approximately KRW 120,500,000,000 among the three floors of the building owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”). On the same day, Plaintiff B and the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant by setting the deposit amount of KRW 22,00,000 on the first floor of the instant building as KRW 28,000,000,000,000 on August 5, 2001.

Since the term of lease stipulated in each of the above lease agreements expired and the plaintiffs delivered each of the above lease sections to the defendant, the defendant is obligated to refund the above lease deposit to the plaintiffs, and the plaintiff B was awarded a favorable judgment (the Mine District Court Decision 2006Kadan24269, hereinafter referred to as the "previous judgment") by filing a lawsuit against the defendant claiming the payment of the above lease deposit against the defendant. The plaintiff B filed the lawsuit of this case for the extension of the statute of limitations.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On or around December 20, 197, the Defendant and Nonparty E agreed to construct the instant building together, and contracted the construction of the instant building to Plaintiff A on or around December 20, 1997. (2) On or around August 5, 1999, Plaintiff A and the Defendant concluded a lease contract (hereinafter “the instant lease contract”) with a lease deposit for about 60 square meters (hereinafter “one story”) out of the first floor of the instant building (including 2 partitions, E stores owned by the Defendant, and 2 partitions) with the lease deposit for about KRW 22 million among the stores (hereinafter “one story”). However, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to substitute for the payment of the said lease deposit for the construction price of the Plaintiff A’s claim.

3. On October 5, 200, the Defendant and E contracted the extension of the third floor of the instant building to Plaintiff A, and set the construction cost of the part owned by the Defendant as KRW 25 million, and the construction cost of the part owned by the Defendant as KRW 28 million.

At the time of the plaintiff A.

arrow