beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2017.02.14 2016가단10522

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On May 13, 201, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate from Defendant B and C as the broker of the Defendant B and C (hereinafter “instant sale”). The Plaintiff determined the sales amount of KRW 1,187,700,000, which is set at KRW 11,100,000 per square year (=107 square meters x 11,100,000,000 won, and KRW 2.7 million reduction).

However, as the area of the instant real estate was confirmed to be 320 square meters, Defendant B, C, and the Korea Licensed Real Estate Agent Association claimed that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the excess area of KRW 108,300,000, which is the amount equivalent to the excess of the sales price under the sales contract - 354 square meters in size under the sales contract - 320 square meters in size of the real estate.

2. Determination

A. The "trade which designates the quantity" as stipulated in Article 574 of the Civil Code refers to the case where the parties set the price based on the volume at the time that the specific goods, which are the object of the sale, have a certain quantity. Thus, in the sale and purchase of land, even if an object is specified in accordance with the area on the registry, if the party has assessed the designated area as a whole even if it was specified in accordance with the area on the registry, and the calculation by the area was merely a single standard, it cannot be said that it was a trade which designates the land between the parties and has designated the price.

B. (See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da65189 delivered on January 24, 2003).

The Plaintiff is liable for damages on the premise that the sales price in this case was designated by quantity. However, in light of the fact that the price ratio per the sales area does not include the sale price ratio, the Plaintiff comprehensively takes over the building and the land, and there is no reason to conduct a survey for settlement of purchase price.