손해배상(기)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Basic facts
A. On October 5, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase KRW 434,000,000 from the Defendant’s real estate (hereinafter “instant forest”) owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”) via C engaged in real estate brokerage business (hereinafter “instant contract”).
The Plaintiff paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 20,000,000 via C on the date of concluding the contract, and the remainder of KRW 414,00,000 on December 5, 2012, the real estate sales contract (Evidence A (Evidence A 1) entered the remainder payment as “the December 5, 2013.” This is a clerical error.
The agreement was made to pay.
B. On December 24, 2012, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of four persons, such as H, J, K, L, etc. on the grounds of sale as of December 24, 2012 with respect to each forest of this case.
C. The sales contract of this case states that "if the seller or the purchaser fails to perform the contractual obligation, the other party may notify the non-performance party in writing, cancel the contract, claim damages due to the cancellation of the contract, and unless otherwise agreed, the contract deposit shall be deemed as the basis for compensation for damages."
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4, 6 evidence, Eul 1 evidence (including above numbers, hereinafter the same), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. Since the Defendant alleged by the Plaintiff arbitrarily sold the instant forest to a third party and the obligation to transfer ownership pursuant to the instant sales contract was impossible, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 40,000,000,000 in total, including the down payment of KRW 20,000,000 and the estimated amount of damages for damages.
B. The instant sales contract was cancelled since the Plaintiff alleged by the Defendant did not pay the remainder on the date of payment of the remainder under the instant sales contract. Thus, the Defendant down payment to the Plaintiff.