소유권이전등기절차이행
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is that the defendant's new argument at the trial is stated in the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except as follows, since the defendant's new decision on the new argument at the trial is the same as the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the court's explanation of this case is based on the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. The Defendant asserts that even if the instant sales contract was lawfully concluded, D merely received KRW 10,000,000 out of the down payment of KRW 20,000,000,000, and thus, the instant sales contract was rescinded on the ground of the Plaintiff’s down payment, etc.
According to the evidence Nos. 7-1 and 2-2, the defendant sent to the plaintiff the content-certified mail containing his/her declaration of intent to cancel the contract of this case on March 21, 2012 on the ground that the plaintiff's down payment is unpaid, and the above content-certified mail reaches the plaintiff on the 26th of the same month. However, according to the evidence Nos. 3-1 and 11-2 of the same month, as Eul is investigated by the police in relation to H's perjury, it can be acknowledged that he/she received the down payment of KRW 20 million from the buyer on the date of the conclusion of the contract of this case and stated that he/she paid KRW 10,000 among them to G. According to the above facts, since D received KRW 20,00,000 from the buyer on the day of the contract of this case, it cannot be deemed that there is a legitimate reason for the defendant's cancellation of contract due to default such as the plaintiff's down payment.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
B. In addition, the defendant's claim for the implementation of the procedure of application for permission for a land transaction contract between the plaintiff and the defendant based on the contract of this case (Jincheon District Court Decision 2008Gahap3304).