[2] In a case where only a contract is specified as an object of a contract that designates only a unit and unit of an apartment, and there is no agreement on the standard and method for specifying the unit price in the future without stipulating the important matters of a contract, such as the amount of the unit price and the time of delivery of the unit price (negative), whether the contract can be deemed as

[2] In order to establish a contract for the sale of an apartment, etc., there must be an agreement on the standard and method to specify the important matters of the contract, such as the amount of the sale price, the delivery of the object of sale, the time of transfer of ownership, etc., in addition to the sale price, or the standard and method to specify such important matters in the future. In a case where only the contract subject to the designation of an apartment complex is specified, and there is no other important matters of the contract, such as the amount of the sale price, and the time of delivery of the object, and where it is difficult to deem that there is a binding agreement on the criteria and method to specify it in the future,

1. In order for a contract to be concluded, there must be an agreement between the parties as to the terms and conditions of the contract. Such agreement is not required with respect to all matters that form the content of the contract. It would suffice that there exists an agreement with respect to the essential elements or important matters in a specific manner or at least an agreement with respect to standards, methods, etc. to specify them in the future. Meanwhile, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, a contract shall be deemed not to have been concluded (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da51650, Mar. 23, 2001, etc.).

In order to establish a contract for the sale of an apartment, there is an agreement on the amount of the sale price in lots, standards and methods that can specify the important matters of the contract such as the delivery of the object and the time of transfer of ownership in addition to the sale price of the apartment, or on the criteria and methods that can specify the future in detail (hereinafter referred to as "contract for the designation of an apartment unit and an apartment unit"). In cases where a contract for the sale of an apartment is only specified as an object, and the amount of the sale price and the time of delivery of the object are not determined, and where it is difficult to deem that there is a binding agreement on the criteria and methods that can specify the apartment unit in the future, the above contract cannot be deemed as a sale contract,

2. The lower court acknowledged the following facts.

A. In concluding the sales contract with the plaintiffs for the apartment of this case, the defendant agreed to implement the "in-depth security system of contract terms". This is, in principle, not to modify the future contract terms, and if the defendant concludes the sales contract with the other buyers prior to the date of approval for use of the apartment of this case (including approval for provisional use) under the contract terms favorable to the plaintiffs, the above favorable contract terms should be applied retroactively to the plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as the "instant special agreement").

B. After that, on November 23, 2012, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Nonparty on the designation of △△△△△dong, the instant apartment building (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and received KRW 1 million from the Nonparty as the down payment on the same day.

C. The instant agreement on the designation of the Dong and Dong-dong apartment of this case does not state any indication on the sale price and payment method for the apartment ○○○○ Dong, and the delivery of the object and the time of transfer of ownership, and does not specify any specific method and criteria later.

D. The instant contract for the designation of Dong and Dong trees was made between December 1, 2012 and one week prior to the scheduled date of approval for the use of the instant apartment (the date of approval for the actual use is December 3, 2012) and the Defendant’s sales staff member stated that the Nonparty would be entitled to discount about 10% of the normal sale price and exempt the balcony expansion cost. However, the above sales staff member of the Defendant stated that “the sales staff of the instant unit shall be entitled to exempt the Nonparty from the balcony extension cost.” However, upon the Nonparty’s demand to request the Nonparty to enter the above contract terms in the instant agreement for the designation of Dong and Dong trees, the said sales staff member of the instant unit was written only as “the sale in lots under the conditions changed after December 1.”

E. The instant contract for the designation of Dong and Hosu stated that the contractor’s certificate of personal seal impression, resident registration certificate, seal imprint, and identification card are needed in the case of a fixed contract. 30% price of the persons who entered into a contract for the designation of Dong and Hosu did not enter into a fixed contract, and the designated contract was returned to those persons as they were.

F. The fixed sale contract on the instant apartment ○○○dong △△△△△ was concluded on December 8, 2012 after the date of approval for the use of the instant apartment.

3. In light of various circumstances, such as the contents of the instant agreement on the designation of the Dong and Dong, the process and timing of conclusion, and the timing and contents of the instant agreement on the apartment of this case, the Defendant should be deemed to have ordered the Nonparty to enter into the sales contract by modifying the contract conditions after the date of approval for use at the time of the instant agreement on the designation of Dong and Dong heading, and to have the Nonparty secured the number of Dong and Dong units. It is difficult to deem that the Defendant had an intention to finally revise the terms of the sales contract on the instant apartment of this case ○○ Dong-dong △△△△△△△△△△ through the instant agreement on the designation of Dong and Dong heading. It is difficult to deem that the Defendant

The lower court’s determination to the same purport is justifiable. In so determining, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine

4. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in entirety as it is without merit, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

[Attachment] List of Plaintiffs: Omitted

Justices Park Poe-young (Presiding Justice)