매매대금
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Judgment as to the defendant's defense prior to the merits
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the cause of the claim is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff purchased one-half share of the 253 square meters of land among the 291 square meters of land and 706 square meters of land in Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si, 291 square meters of land and D forest land owned by the Defendant; (b) the above C road and E road are divided into 253 square meters of land; (c) even though the Defendant paid the purchase price of KRW 158,00,000 to the Defendant, the Defendant transferred each of the above shares to Nonparty F and thus, the Defendant was unable
Each of the instant lands is part of H, I forest, J, and K forest (hereinafter “land subject to sale”) in Gwangju-si, which the Plaintiff and G (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) decided to purchase from the Defendant.
If a sales contract for land subject to sale (hereinafter referred to as "sales contract for all land") receives any balance, the defendant is obligated to register the ownership transfer to the plaintiff, etc. or the person designated by the plaintiff, etc.
The Defendant had completed the registration of ownership transfer for each of the instant lands to F without seeking consent or confirmation from the Plaintiff even if part of the remainder was paid by the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate for the amount equivalent to the purchase price paid, which is the plaintiff's damage, because he violated the sales contract for the entire land.
B. Defendant’s assertion and determination 1) As to the defense prior to the merits of this case, each of the instant land, etc. is primarily incorporated into the road site, the Plaintiff’s filing of all civil petitions (including withdrawal of existing civil petitions) is prohibited, and cooperate with development activities and building permission, and the ownership change (or civil and criminal issues related to the exercise of ownership), and the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is paid KRW 100 million.