매매대금반환 등
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it is intended to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Details to be removed or added;
A. On May 12, 2011, the lower court’s judgment No. 3, 201, held that “The instant real estate was subject to the establishment of a collateral security right under the name of the Chuncheon Hacheon Livestock Industry Cooperatives, the maximum debt amount of which is KRW 14 billion,” and changed on December 6, 2011 to KRW 28 billion, while “F completed the provisional registration of the right to claim a transfer of ownership on the instant real estate on April 9, 2012.”
B. On April 11, 2013, the part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “E.” in the part 3 of the judgment, “E.”, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant Union a certificate of content that sought the return of the instant purchase price and loan.”
C. According to the above-mentioned facts, the sales contract of this case was lawfully rescinded on April 11, 2013, which was stated in the first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance court’s first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment from 14th to 15th, and it shall be deemed that the sales contract of this case was lawfully rescinded upon the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent made on April 11, 2013 due to delay of performance or non-performance refusal by the Defendant union, or that at least the delivery of the complaint of this case was rescinded by the Defendant association’s second instance court’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment
In addition, the Defendant Union did not comply with the registration procedure for ownership transfer of the instant real estate upon the Plaintiff’s request.
The Plaintiff’s increase in provisional registration or the maximum amount of debt on the instant real estate after the instant sales contract was concluded.