Duty to return the deposit to the successful bidder of the leased building;

If a lessee completed the delivery and resident registration of the building prior to the registration of establishment of a neighboring building which was the cause of auction, the successful bidder of the building at issue shall succeed to the lessor's status of the building at issue, and as long as the lease contract at issue is terminated, the lessee shall be obligated to refund

Article 3 of the Housing Lease Protection Act

Civil Conflict of Law

Nonparty 1

Seoul District Court Branch (82 Gohap2471)

The appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Text 1 of the original judgment can be provisionally executed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 8,00,000 with five percent per annum from October 6, 1982 to the delivery date of the complaint of this case, and twenty-five percent per annum from the next day to the full payment date.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant and a declaration of provisional execution.

The original judgment shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be assessed against the plaintiff at his/her own expense in the first and second instances.

In light of the above facts, Gap evidence No. 1 (the copy of the register No. 1) and Eul evidence No. 3 (the same as Eul evidence No. 5-2), Gap evidence No. 2, which was established by the testimony of the witness Gap 2, the above witness of the court below and the records of the court below (the Seoul District Court's Dong branch court's 8275 real estate auction records and the records of non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 2's non-party 9's non-party 9's non-party 2's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 2's non-party 9's non-party 2's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 9'

According to the above facts, the above lease contract between the plaintiff and the non-party 2 cannot achieve the purpose of the lease due to the above delivery execution by the defendant, and thus the contract is terminated as the same person. Meanwhile, the plaintiff succeeded to the status of the non-party 2 as the lessor by winning the above building upon the completion of delivery and resident registration prior to the establishment registration prior to the establishment registration prior to the above auction, which caused the above auction. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the above lease deposit to the original state following the termination of the above lease contract.

Although the defendant asserted that the plaintiff conspired with the non-party 2, who was well aware of his opinion, and concluded a false lease agreement on the building of this case among them, the defendant's above assertion is not acceptable, since there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's above assertion in addition to the evidence

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above lease deposit amount of 8,00,000 won and damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from October 6, 1982 to November 5, 1982 on the record that the above lease contract was terminated, and from November 6, 1982 to the date of delivery of the complaint of this case, from November 5, 1982, and from November 6, the next day to the date of full payment, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted as reasonable, and since the original judgment is justified and the defendant's appeal is recognized, it shall be dismissed, and the costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant who is the losing party and the provisional execution shall be permitted. It is so decided as per Disposition with the order.

Judge Lee Han-gu (Presiding Judge)