beta
(영문) 광주고등법원(전주) 2017.11.23 2017나10249

소유권말소등기

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendants shall share 1/2 of each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

(c) shall be.

(2) The Defendants, on the same day, issued promissory notes with face value of KRW 400 million and date of payment, August 29, 2017. As to this, a notary public, on the same day, written a notarial deed stating the purport of recognizing compulsory execution under No. 1045 of the office (hereinafter “notarial deed No. 2 of this case”), and written a notarial deed containing the purport of recognizing compulsory execution under No. 1045 of the same day (hereinafter “notarial deed No. 1 of this case”). The notarial deed of Articles 1 and 2 of this case was written.

On September 4, 2014, the Defendants drafted a loan certificate stating that “the Defendant borrowed KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff on October 30, 2014 (it is possible for the Defendant to repay early)” (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) to the Plaintiff.

E. On September 6, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendants added the following special terms regarding the sales price, etc. to the instant sales contract.

(2) On August 29, 2014, the Plaintiff is entitled to deposit money of KRW 400,000 on August 29, 2017 (No. 400,000,000) and KRW 400,000 on September 33, 2014 (No. 550,000,000) and KRW 80,000 (No. 400,000,000) on September 1, 2014 (No. 40,000,000,000) without consideration on September 1, 2014 (No. 40,50,000 (No. 50,000,000) and on September 10, 2014 (No. 400,000,000).

Provided, however, in the event that the Defendants redeem the total amount of KRW 400 million of a promissory note prior to the due date, the Plaintiff is able to engage in business according to the seller’s intent as before August 29, 2017.