계약금반환
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.
1. The reasoning for this part of the reasoning by the court is as follows: (a) Each “Plaintiff” portion of the judgment of the first instance is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, except where all “new comprehensive construction (new industrial development)” is deemed to be “new comprehensive construction” among the parts of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Summary of the parties' arguments
A. Article 9(5) of the Contracts for the First and Second Sale of the Plaintiffs stipulates that if the Plaintiffs fail to pay the purchase price and the Defendant cancels the contract, the contract bond shall be reverted to the Defendant. This constitutes an estimate of the amount of damages under Article 398 of the Civil Act, which is an excessive amount of liquidated damages, and thus, shall be reduced within an appropriate scope pursuant to Article 398(2) of the Civil Act. The said reduced portion shall be null and void from the beginning.
Therefore, the Defendant should return as unjust enrichment the remainder amount exceeding 50% of the contract deposits of the first and second sales contracts, which can be seen as an adequate scope, namely, Plaintiff 4,932,766,00 won, Plaintiff 2,887,615,00 won, and damages for delay, respectively.
B. Article 9(5) of the 1st and 2nd sales contract provides that in the event of the rescission of the contract by the defendant due to the plaintiffs' breach of the contract, the contract bond that belongs to the defendant is not the liquidated damages but the contract bond that belongs to the defendant is not the penalty for breach of contract, the reduction itself under Article 398
Furthermore, even if the legal nature of the contract bond is expected to be compensated for damages, the estimated amount of damages under Article 398(2) of the Civil Act shall not be deemed to be an unreasonable and excessive case, so it shall not be reduced.
3. Determination
A. 1 penalty of the legal nature of the contract bond is presumed to be the liquidated damages under Article 398(4) of the Civil Act.