beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.06 2016가단3223

약정금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 200,000,000 as well as annual 5% from January 1, 2016 to January 25, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On May 12, 2014, the Plaintiff drafted a written agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the Defendant, who arranged the purchase of the land outside C and six parcels in Ansan-si, as follows.

The plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as "A") and the defendants (hereinafter referred to as "B") agree as follows:

1. Recognizing that Party B would reimburse Party A of KRW 200 million.

2. B shall pay the above KRW 200 million up to December 31, 2015, and shall be liable and traded for the above KRW 200 million, and the above KRW 200 million shall be preferentially repaid to A, by selling and buying the parcels outside C and six parcels at Ansan.

3. Eul shall be responsible for and resolve the maximum debt amount of the training agricultural cooperative's KRW 150,000,000, which is established on the above land registered as owned by mother-friendly D.

4. Eul set the right to collateral security of KRW 260 million to Gap with respect to the above land.

5. Gap shall revoke Eul's complaint immediately after the establishment of the above right to collateral security.

6. Eul shall make every effort to repay the above KRW 200 million to Gap even before December 31, 2015.

【Ground of recognition】 Each entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 200 million as agreed in the agreement of this case and damages for delay.

B. As to this, the defendant filed a complaint against the defendant and provided the defendant with KRW 130 million with the purchase fund of the above land even though he only concealed such fact, thereby omitting the defendant's error and allowing the defendant to prepare the instant agreement. The defendant asserts that since this constitutes the expression of intent by the plaintiff's fraud, the defendant's expression of intent contained in the instant agreement is revoked through the delivery of a preparatory document dated April 21, 2016, as it constitutes the expression of intent by the plaintiff's fraud.

However, the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 is respectively.