beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.01.10 2019나68534

약정금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim is that the Defendants used the Plaintiff’s land of 11,180 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in Sungsung-si, Seosung-si, the Plaintiff leased, and agreed to pay KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff in return for using the said land. As such, the Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 30 million and delay damages.

2. In full view of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 1 through 3 as well as the overall purport of the arguments and arguments, the Plaintiff leased the instant land from the E and one other around December 12, 2012. The Defendants are deemed to have agreed to bear the funds of Defendant B and distribute profits generated by Defendant C from the land of this case, and it appears that Defendant C did not live in the land of this case around 2014.

However, in light of the following circumstances revealed by adding up the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, and Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 3, the above facts are insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants agreed to pay KRW 30 million to the plaintiff in return for forming a Saturdays farmer on the instant land. There is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion against the Defendants is without merit.

(1) There is no objective evidence such as a written agreement to prove that the Defendants agreed to pay KRW 30 million in return for the use of the instant land to the Plaintiff.

See The Plaintiff appeared and testified as a witness in the lawsuit for the price of goods (Seoul Eastern District Court 2015Kadan1049) brought by F against Defendant B, and only stated to the effect that “Defendant C used the instant land,” and Defendant B used the instant land.

or a statement to the effect that the payment of such consideration has been made; or

Rather, the plaintiff is "whether it is a claim or obligation that the plaintiff exchanges with the defendant B."