계약금반환
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as to the plaintiff on September 2017.
1. The reasons why this Court uses this part of the basic facts are the same as the statement in the "1. Basic Facts" of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Whether the contract of this case is rescinded due to delay of performance;
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff argued that the non-party company will take over the right of management on December 1, 2012 under the contract of this case, but the defendant, while avoiding contact with the plaintiff without any preparation for transfer of the right of management, he refused to transfer the right of management on December 1, 2012. The contract of this case was cancelled by the plaintiff's notification as of January 16, 2013, or by delivery of the preparatory document as of August 25, 2016. Since the contract of this case was terminated as the defendant's delay of payment, the defendant did not request the plaintiff to take over the part payment as of December 20, 2012 without giving any preparation for transfer of the right of management. The defendant's remaining contract of this case to the plaintiff as of December 16, 2012.
Since the contract of this case was cancelled due to the cause attributable to the plaintiff, the plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 100 million in the predetermined amount of damages, and accordingly, the defendant returned the remaining KRW 100 million after deducting it from the down payment 200 million to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff'
B. In the judgment 1 bilateral contract, the obligation to object is being delayed when the contract has not been rescinded.