부당이득금
1. The Defendants: (a) from August 2, 2016 to Defendant B with respect to each of the Plaintiff KRW 25 million; and (b) from Defendant C with respect to August 17, 2016 to the Plaintiff.
Basic Facts
A. On May 30, 2016, the Plaintiff introduced, from a licensed real estate agent D, the E large scale 50 square meters of the Defendants’ co-ownership, and the 50 square meters of the sloping roof of reinforced concrete structure, and the 56 square meters of F large scale 56 square meters, G large scale 96 square meters, and the 5-story of the ground reinforced concrete structure (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”), and transferred KRW 50 million to the account under Defendant B’s name on the same day.
B. On June 22, 2016, the Plaintiff notified Defendant B of the absence of intent to purchase the instant real estate through content-certified mail.
C. Among the instant real estate, the building was operated as a telecom, etc., and the maximum debt amount of KRW 732,000,000 was set up on the instant real estate.
【In the absence of any dispute, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 50 million to the Defendants as a provisional contract deposit, under the circumstance that the contract term of the instant real estate sales contract cannot be deemed to have been concluded due to the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the entire pleadings, as the claim of the parties to the instant real estate sales contract was not finalized.
Since the above provisional contract amount was received on the premise that it will be returned if the principal contract for the sale was not concluded, the Defendants are obligated to return the above provisional contract amount to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment unless the principal contract for the sale was concluded between the original Defendant.
Even if this contract was concluded, the Defendants committed deception on the condition of the building, whether the building was illegally constructed, and the current status of the lease. The sales contract was revoked by the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case on the grounds of such deception or mistake caused thereby.
When the plaintiff alleged by the defendants remitted KRW 50 million to the defendants, the principal contract for the sale of the real estate of this case has already been concluded, and the above KRW 50 million constitutes penalty.