beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.05.24 2018나62612

계약금반환 등

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The defendant is a promotion committee established to promote the redevelopment project in the B region, and the plaintiff is a person who was a member of the defendant.

B. The Plaintiff paid 88,285,300 won to the Defendant in total, including KRW 10 million, KRW 27.5 million, KRW 1, and KRW 25,392, and KRW 650, respectively.

C. On November 1, 2017, the Plaintiff terminated the partnership membership agreement and withdraws from the partnership, and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 88,285,300 up to December 15, 2017.

The Defendant paid KRW 60,785,300 to the Defendant on November 21, 2017 pursuant to the above agreement, but did not pay the remainder of KRW 27,50,000.

The Defendant agreed to refund KRW 5,00,000, which was payable on January 25, 2018, in five installments, to refund KRW 27,500,000,00 each until March 12, 2018. < Amended by Act No. 15320, Feb. 2, 2018; Act No. 15335, Feb. 12, 2018; Act No. 15304, Feb. 2, 2018; Act No. 15304, Mar. 5, 2018; Act No. 15306, Mar.

(hereinafter “instant refund agreement”). The Defendant paid only KRW 7,00,000,000 to the Plaintiff, including KRW 3,000,000 on February 2, 2018, and KRW 4,000,000 on February 12, 2018.

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining amount of 20,500,000 won (27,500,000 won - 7,000,000 won) under the refund agreement in this case and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from April 27, 2018 to the date following the delivery of a copy of the complaint in this case to the date of full payment, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The defendant's assertion and its judgment on the defendant's money that the plaintiff paid to the defendant should be confiscated upon termination of the partnership subscription contract due to the plaintiff's reason attributable to the defendant, and the amount payable to the plaintiff is returned in sequence to the plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the plaintiff's ground for termination of the contract or additional repayment. Thus, the defendant'

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.