beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.05.31 2017가단92157

매매대금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 6, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant, setting the sales price of KRW 2.646 million with respect to the instant land on the aggregate of 5,833 square meters in Ildong-dong, Seosan-gu, Incheon-si, and KRW 432 square meters in D forest, KRW 232 square meters in E forest, and KRW 232 square meters in F forest, and KRW 6729 square meters in total (hereinafter referred to as “instant forest,” and collectively referred to as “four lots in the instant forest,” including the four parcels in the said forest, and paid the purchase price in full to the Defendant by December 31, 2016.

B. On June 2017, upon the Plaintiff’s application, the instant forest was subject to registration conversion into G forest in Yadong-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-si, and as a result of the survey conducted in the process, a cadastral adjustment was conducted with the area of 5,532 square meters below 301 square meters, which is the area of the instant forest on the initial register.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1-7, Eul evidence 2-7, Eul evidence 2-7 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. 1) The instant sales contract constitutes a numerically designated sale and purchase price of KRW 2.6 billion per square meter (i.e., KRW 2., KRW 2.66 million (i.e., KRW 2,035.5 square meter) with respect to the instant four parcels of forest (i.e., KRW 2., KRW 2.66 million) and thus, the Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff the sales contract reduced the sales price of KRW 118,368,250 (i.e., KRW 1., KRW 1.., KRW 1.3 million per square meter) with respect to the instant four parcels of forest (i.e., KRW 1., KRW 1.3 million per square meter x KRW 91.0525). Even if the instant sales contract does not constitute a numerically designated sale and sale, the Defendant did not notify the Plaintiff of the fact that the actual area of the instant forest was not known or could have been known, and thus, did not notify the Plaintiff of such fact.