약정금
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal.
1. The defendant's appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance except where the court emphasizes or adds the following arguments. The defendant's appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance is justified even if the evidence submitted by the court of first instance in the court of first instance was delivered with the evidence presented by this court.
Therefore, the reasoning for the statement on this case is as follows: Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings”), Article 2(2) of the Addenda of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 3(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Legal Interest Rate, Article 3(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Legal Interest Rate (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29768, May 21, 2019); Article 15% per annum under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29768, May 21, 201); Article 3(2) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Legal Proceedings; Article 3(1) of the same Act 5% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment; and Article 3(2) of the judgment as follows.
2. Additional determination
A. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff did not secure the project site as of the date five years have passed since the contract of this case was entered into with the defendant, and the housing construction project is not approved, and the contract is not impossible to perform, and it is not domestic affairs.
Even if the supply of housing was delayed due to disputes with partners, contractors, and agencies for several years, so the obligation of the Plaintiff under the above contract was omitted due to the delay in performance. Thus, the Defendant cancelled the above contract due to the impossibility or delay in performance of the Plaintiff.
B. According to each description of the certificate Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the instant project site.