[손해배상][집21(3)민,143 공1973.12.15.(478), 7618]
Effect of the receipt of deposited goods
As long as the money which is an amount equal to the deposit money for the cancellation of a sales contract has been deposited and the deposit money has been received, the effect of extinction of the obligation takes place due to the cause of deposit as set out in the deposit certificate, which is not a claim for refund to the deposited public official with reservation attached by the Plaintiff, and even if the Plaintiff immediately notified the Defendant of the intention of reservation by the special group, it may not affect the said legal effect.
Article 8 of the Deposit Act, Article 487 of the Civil Act
[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 2 others
Defendant 1 and four others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee and one other, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee)
Seoul High Court Decision 72Na654 delivered on August 31, 1972
The part of the original judgment against the Defendants shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court.
As to the Defendants’ legal representatives’ ground of appeal No. 2
In its explanation of its reasoning, the judgment of the court below: (a) on May 12, 1971, the defendants declared to the plaintiff that they will cancel the contract in accordance with Article 6 of the sales contract, and (b) on May 13, 1971, the defendant 1 delegated by the other defendants on behalf of the defendants, deposited 20,000 won, which is the multiple amount of the contract deposit, to cancel the contract; (c) the plaintiff refused to receive the above deposit by failing to comply with the above defendants' intention to cancel the contract; (d) the plaintiff refused to receive the above deposit; and (e) filed the principal suit; and (e) was sentenced to the plaintiff winning judgment and the partial provisional execution on March 24, 1972, and received the above deposit money in part, and notified the same defendants that he would immediately receive the above money as part of the damages due to default; and (e) the plaintiff's intention to cancel the contract was expressed to the above defendant that the plaintiff was not entitled to receive the above deposit money.
However, as long as the Defendants deposited 20,000,000 won, which is a part of the deposit money for the cancellation of this case, and received the deposit money, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in matters of law by misunderstanding legal principles as to the receipt of the deposit, and it is reasonable to have discussed this point of view and to reverse the judgment without any other grounds of appeal. The judgment of the court below is reversed without merit.
Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges pursuant to Article 406 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Justices Rin- Port (Presiding Justice)