beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.12.22 2020가단118710

소유권이전등기

Text

The Defendant, as the Plaintiff

A. On February 1, 2019, the shares of 1/2 from among apartment buildings entered in the indication of attached real estate.

Reasons

1. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of claim

A. Facts 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on February 1, 2019. The following: (a) the Defendant, on February 1, 2019, implemented the procedures for ownership transfer registration based on the property division agreement on February 1, 2019 with respect to one-half portion of the apartment units indicated in the Defendant’s attached real estate, to the Plaintiff; (b) the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 32,000,000 to the Plaintiff; and (c) the Defendant received KRW 2,00,000,000 in the aggregate of KRW 50,000 per month from February 2019 to November 30, 2021; and (d) the Plaintiff received KRW 30,000,000 in the aggregate of KRW 30,000 per month for 30 months from June 2, 200, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] The fact that the plaintiff is a person, the absence of dispute, each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. In light of the facts acknowledged above, the Defendant shall, in accordance with the above agreement, pay the Plaintiff KRW 24,00,000,000, out of the unpaid amount of KRW 32,000,000, which is due to the property division agreement on February 1, 2019, and the Plaintiff shall be paid KRW 24,00,000,000, out of the unpaid amount by the due date, as the Plaintiff seeks, and as the Plaintiff seeks, the amount of KRW 9,00,000, out of the unpaid amount by the due date, and the delay damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from September 12, 2020 to the date of full payment after the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case from September 12, 200 to the date of full payment, and the Plaintiff shall be liable to pay KRW 15,00,000 (= the above KRW 24,00,000,00).

(2) The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, since the defendant is dissatisfied with the existence of the obligation, it is necessary to claim it in advance.