beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the dismissal under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act is applied to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.
2. The following facts were found: ① At the time of the lease of this case (as of September 1, 2013), the registration of creation of a mortgage (total of KRW 168,000,000) was completed over each of the maximum debt amount of the Plaintiff, and F’s maximum debt amount of KRW 12,00,000,000, regarding the instant real estate at the time of the lease of this case.
② The appraised value of the instant real estate following the voluntary auction on December 19, 2013, which was approximately three months after the lease of the instant case, is KRW 110,00,000.
[Reasons for recognition] Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 9 are as follows: ① In the event that the act of establishing a right of lease subject to protection of the right of priority repayment of a small amount of deposit under Article 8 of the Housing Lease Protection Act is a fraudulent act, it is presumed that the debtor's bad faith is presumed, and the lessee's bad faith is presumed. However, in light of the legislative purport that the right of lease under the above provision of the Housing Lease Protection Act can be recovered in preference to the prior secured creditors, etc., the person acquiring the right of lease under the above provision of the Act has a considerable trust in the recovery of the deposit. Therefore, in determining the tenant's good faith, it should be less attention than ordinary transactions as to whether the lease was in excess of the lessor's obligation, whether the deposit was actually paid, whether the amount of the deposit was appropriate, whether the lease contract was concluded even if there was a circumstance to suspect the excess situation of the lessor's obligation in the relationship of limitation of multiple rights on the registry, and special relationship between the lessor and the lessor.