beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,000,000 and its amount shall be 5% per annum from May 31, 2018 to March 10, 2020 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The description of the cause of claim is as shown in attached Form 1;
(However, “creditor” and “debtor” are “Defendant” and “Defendant”. 2. A judgment by public notice based on recognition (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)
3. In addition, we examine whether the plaintiff can claim opposing power under the Housing Lease Protection Act against C, the successful bidder of the leased house, and seek the return of the lease deposit.
In the event of a successful bid of the immovables subject to auction, the right of lease with either registered or opposing power is extinguished after the senior mortgage is extinguished. Therefore, the successful bidder cannot be deemed to be included in the transferee of the leased house as prescribed in Article 3 of the Housing Lease Protection Act. Therefore, the lessee cannot claim the effect of the right of lease against the successful bidder.
(2) In light of the purport of each entry and pleading in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a lease contract for approximately 60 square meters for D heading 2, Sept. 13, 2014 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) among the buildings listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 through 3 (hereinafter “instant building”); (2) thereafter, the compulsory auction procedure for the instant building was conducted; and (3) thereafter, C paid the proceeds by bid and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 18, 2018; and (3) the fact that prior collateral security established prior to the date of conclusion of the instant lease contract was cancelled as a cause of sale for compulsory auction due to the said compulsory auction procedure.
In light of the aforementioned legal principles, even if the Plaintiff assumed that he had opposing power under the Housing Lease Protection Act with regard to about 60 square meters of the building of this case among the buildings of this case, the right of lease was also extinguished due to the extinguishment of senior mortgage.
Therefore, the plaintiff is the successful bidder of the building of this case.