beta
Text
1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list No. 2.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
Reasons
In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 1-1 and No. 2 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the building listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter “instant building”) is owned by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant may recognize the fact that he occupied the instant building while residing in the instant building.
Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff.
As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant stated that C himself, who was residing in the building of this case, is the plaintiff's Dong and the local resident, entered into a lease contract on the building of this case on behalf of the plaintiff. The defendant actually deposited the deposit amount of KRW 130 million in the bank account under the name of the plaintiff, and thus, the above lease contract becomes effective against the plaintiff pursuant to Article 126 of the Civil Act, and therefore, the above claim cannot be accepted before the plaintiff is refunded the deposit.
First, in the defendant's assertion of the above expression representation, we examine whether C has the basic power of representation to conclude a lease agreement on the building of this case.
Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statements in the Evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 4-1, and 2, C concluded on November 22, 2010 with the Defendant a lease contract of KRW 130 million to the instant building under the name of the Plaintiff, and C may recognize the fact that C received the said lease deposit with the account in the name of the Plaintiff, and the fact that the Plaintiff resided in the instant building without compensation and conferred the authority to manage the instant building.
However, such circumstance alone is insufficient to recognize that C had the basic authority to conclude a lease agreement on the instant building, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Furthermore, even if the defendant's assertion is based on the defendant's argument, the defendant believed only C's remarks.