분양대금청구의 소
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant to the following 2.
2. Judgment on the defendant's grounds for appeal
A. At the time of entering into the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff agreed to arrange for the Defendant to receive the intermediate payment at a low interest rate from financial institutions, but not only arranged the Defendant to arrange for the Defendant to obtain the intermediate payment at a low interest rate, but also made false or exaggerated advertisement without providing specific explanation as to the financial institutions, terms and conditions of loans, and the Plaintiff’s exemption clause. The Defendant, due to the Plaintiff’s deception, went through mistake, thereby entering into the instant sales contract. For this reason, the Defendant did not have the obligation to pay the Plaintiff the sales price. 2) The Defendant concluded the instant sales contract with the belief that it is possible to grant the intermediate payment, and was unable to perform the obligation to pay the intermediate payment and the remainder as the Plaintiff’s above was unable to grant the intermediate payment due to the cause attributable to the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim in this case can be seen as abuse of rights, so termination of contract due to the Defendant’s impossibility of performance should be acknowledged, and even if not, the Plaintiff’s claim amount should be adjusted to an appropriate level.
3. Even if the Defendant’s obligation to pay intermediate payments and remainder against the Plaintiff is recognized, this is related to the Plaintiff’s obligation to deliver the instant real estate to the Defendant simultaneously.
B. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or take account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 9, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3: