약정금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. According to the reasoning of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant specified in the agreement that on September 28, 2010, the plaintiff will transfer 50 equity to the plaintiff with respect to the Dong-dong (D private teaching institute site) of the Cheongju City on September 28, 2010 without any condition.
The fact that a letter of agreement (the evidence No. 1 of this case, hereinafter referred to as the “instant letter of agreement”) in which the content of the letter of agreement is written may be recognized.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff asserts that the "Cheongju-si C-dong (D D-dong site)" stipulated in the instant agreement refers to the area of 2,304 square meters for E- miscellaneous land in substantial Cheongju-si, and that as the above E-land was expropriated, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff compensation amounting to 175,671,330 won and delay damages amounting to 50 square meters of compensation amounting to 613,252,644.
B. The Defendant asserts that the “Cheongju-si, substantial C-dong (D) site” as stipulated in the instant agreement refers to the land that is the site of D private teaching institutes, rather than the area of 2,304m2,00,000 square meters in substantial E-si, Cheongju-si, and thus, it cannot respond to the Plaintiff’
3. We examine the land indicated in the instant agreement as to whether it refers to 2,304 square meters of land E- miscellaneous land in Cheongju-si.
The fact that the 2,304 square meters of E Miscellaneous land in Cheongju-si is the site of D Teaching Institutes, the fact that the ownership transfer registration was made on March 18, 1992 with respect to 1/4 shares of the above land on the part of the above land on the defendant on March 18, 1992, and the fact that the 613,252,644 won is assigned to the defendant, a co-owner, in a monetary settlement method, to the defendant, is not disputed between the parties, or is recognized by the statement in Gap
However, in light of the following facts and circumstances, there is no dispute between the parties, or in view of the statement of Eul Nos. 1 through 6 (the number of each branch number is included) and the witness F’s testimony, the defendant is one with respect to other land which is not not less than 2,304 square meters in Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si.