채권자대위에기한건축허가권양도대금
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim added in the trial are all dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows, and the following items of the judgment of the court of the first instance shall be dismissed or deleted, and the plaintiff's additional arguments in the court of the first instance shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning for the judgment of the court of the first instance is the same as that for the judgment of the court of the first instance, in addition to the determination of the plaintiff's additional arguments
Part 3, each of " June 28, 2008" in Part 11 shall be changed to " June 28, 2007".
Part 4, the term "this Court" in Part 2 shall be changed to "Court of First Instance".
Part 4 of the part 9 to 16 of the title 9 and the part 7 to 6 of the title 5, “2 of the title 7 to 5 of the title 5,” respectively, shall be deleted. (The plaintiff revoked this part of the claim from the first date for pleading of the first instance trial.)
1) On the 5th page “(1) judgment on the assertion of false conspiracy” is deleted.
Matters to be determined additionally in the trial;
A. The plaintiff 1's assertion as to the liability for damages caused by tort is that the defendant, as one joint tortfeasor, has a duty to compensate for damages equivalent to KRW 1.2 billion of the sales balance of the business site of this case suffered by the plaintiff due to tort liability caused by fraud, on the following grounds.
① Even if I, the actual representative of G, purchased the instant project site and related business rights from the Plaintiff and ordered the Defendant to undertake the construction of a building on the ground of the above project site, I paid the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 1.2 billion and did not have any intent or ability to implement the said project normally as the contractor.
② On the other hand, the Defendant’s substantial owner in collusion with I with the Plaintiff with a well-known knowledge of such fact, thereby deceiving the Plaintiff and buying the instant project site and the instant business right from the Plaintiff on the ground of G.