생활대책용지수분양권명의변경승낙의사표시
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the underlying facts is as stated in paragraph (1) of the first instance court’s judgment, except for the case where “Cheongbuk-gun,” in the second statement of the judgment of the first instance, “Cheongbuk-gun,” and “The Korea Industrial Complex Corporation, March 23, 2016,” in the fourth statement of the third part, “The Korea Industrial Complex Corporation, March 23, 2016,” respectively, is the same as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Plaintiff’s claim 1) The Plaintiff entered into a sales contract for the right to purchase the instant land for countermeasures by preparing not only the sales contract for the instant land for migrants but also the instant contract. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to express his/her consent on the right to purchase the instant land for countermeasures. (2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on May 29, 2013 to pay 330,000 won as damages to the Plaintiff in the event the Defendant violated the obligations relating to the instant sales contract on the right to purchase the instant land for countermeasures and the right to purchase the instant land for countermeasures. Unlike the above sales contract, the Defendant failed to implement the procedure for changing the name of the right to purchase the instant land for countermeasures, and thus the Defendant is obligated to pay damages to the Plaintiff KRW 330,000,000 as damages.
B. 1) Determination 1) In order to establish a contract, there is a need for the objective agreement of several conflicting declarations of intent between the parties, and there is an objective agreement, all of the matters indicated in the parties’ declaration of intent must be the same. In particular, even if the contents of the contract are not “important point” and objective elements of the contract.