logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.10.16 2013나19050
임차보증금반환
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is in accordance with paragraph (1) of the same Article.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is the owner of the house indicated in the attached list, and C is the person who has been in charge of the management, etc. of the instant house.

B. On February 1, 2012, the Plaintiff, as the Defendant’s agent, leased (hereinafter “instant lease”) KRW 206,000,000 as lease deposit and the term of lease from February 1, 2012 to January 31, 2013, and paid KRW 20,000,000 as lease deposit to C.

C. The instant lease agreement expired on January 31, 2013, and the Plaintiff transferred the instant house to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As to the allegation of representation, the Plaintiff asserts that C comprehensively delegated the lease and management of the instant house to C, including the authority to conclude the lease contract, and that C concluded the instant lease contract on behalf of the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant, which the Defendant is obligated to refund the lease deposit to the Plaintiff upon the termination of the instant lease contract. However, it is insufficient to recognize that C was given the authority to conclude the lease contract of the instant house solely with the descriptions of the evidence No. 3-1, No. 6, and No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, and therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

B. As to the assertion on the representation of expression, the Plaintiff: (a) even though he did not have the authority to conclude a monthly rent contract on behalf of the Defendant for the instant house, the Defendant granted C the basic authority to conclude a monthly rent contract on the instant house; and (b) there is a reasonable ground to believe C has a legitimate authority to conclude the instant lease contract; and (c) the Defendant is liable to act as an expression agent pursuant to Article 126 of the Civil Act to the Plaintiff.

arrow