채무부존재확인
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 29, 2017, Plaintiff A entered into a sales contract with the following terms: (a) each land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 through 13; and (b) Plaintiff B’s owner of each land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 14 through 17; and (c) the Plaintiffs and Defendant C’s agents, as indicated in the separate sheet Nos. 14 through 17; and (d) the Plaintiffs and Defendant C’s agents, on June 29, 2017, to sell each land listed in the separate sheet No. 39
(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). 1. As shown in the attached Form indicating real estate
2. As to the sales of the above real estate on September 1, 2017, the buyer of the instant real estate on June 29, 2017, the sales price of KRW 2,390,440,000, the down payment of KRW 239,04,000 is KRW 2,151,396,000,000.
Section 6 of this Agreement shall reimburse the seller of the down payment at the time of the down payment, and the buyer shall waive the down payment at the time of the down payment and shall not claim the return thereof.
(3) Matters to be entered into a special agreement;
2. The transfer registration of ownership shall be made to a person designated by the purchaser on the balance date;
B. On June 29, 2017, the contract date, Defendant C paid the Plaintiffs the down payment of KRW 239,044,000, and on September 12, 2017, Defendant D Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) was established to establish solar power plants on each of the instant land, and E, the agent of the instant sales contract, was appointed as the representative director of the Defendant Company on September 14, 2017.
C. The Defendants requested the Plaintiffs to postpone the payment date of the remainder on September 20, 2017, and the Plaintiffs, on September 4, 2017, extended the payment date to the Defendants until September 20, 2017, but instead did not pay the remainder by the said date, the instant sales contract is deemed to be null and void due to the Defendants’ nonperformance of contractual obligations and the down payment is not returned pursuant to Article 6.
The Plaintiffs and the Defendants in this case on September 21, 2017.