매매대금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On May 21, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant sold D Private Teaching Institutes on Pyeongtaek-si C and 3 (hereinafter “instant Private Teaching Institutes”) for KRW 48 million (hereinafter “instant First Sales Contract”) and agreed to pay the down payment of KRW 10 million on June 1, 2013, and the remainder 38 million to the Plaintiff on November 30, 2013, as there is no dispute between the parties. Thus, according to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the payment of KRW 41,603,460, and delay damages for the Plaintiff’s claim, barring any special circumstance.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. Since the Defendant agreed to cancel the first sale contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, it did not have an obligation to pay the purchase price of the instant case to the Plaintiff.
B. In order to cancel an agreement formed by an agreement between the parties, the requirement is that the opposite expression of intent, such as the offer and acceptance of the rescission contract, which would terminate the validity of the existing contract, is consistent, as in the case of the formation of the contract. For such an agreement to be concluded, the content of the intent expressed by both parties should be objectively consistent.
In addition, the cancellation of a contract may be implicitly made, but if the contract is implicitly rescinded, it is necessary to agree that both parties will not realize the contract due to the lack or renunciation of their intent to realize the contract after the formation of the contract.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da98412 Decided April 28, 2011). C.
In light of the above legal principles, the plaintiff did not dispute between the parties, or in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 4, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18 (including each number), and witness E's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings.