위약금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
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 the following parts being cited or added. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
[Supplementary or added parts] Part II of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be subject to " November 17, 2013" in Part 17 of the judgment of the court of first instance.
Part 4 of the decision of the court of first instance shall be affixed with the "signing" of the 17th page.
Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court, "No. 8 (Certificate)" in Part 6 of the judgment of the fifth instance shall be written with "No. 8 (Certificate)".
Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court shall be subject to the "No. 4 (Agreement, and Certificate of Seal Imprint)" in Part 10 (Agreement, Certificate of Seal Imprint), "No. 4 (Contract, Contract, and Agreement)".
Part VI of the judgment of the first instance court shall add the following information to the following information:
In addition, according to the purport of the argument in the statement in Eul evidence No. 4 (a sales contract and agreement), the J made an agreement on November 14, 2013 to impose interest on KRW 1.2 billion on the Defendant from the central branch of the NAF branch of the NAF on November 12, 2013. The J made an agreement to pay the interest on the Defendant from December 14, 2013, and the Defendant acquired the status of purchaser on November 15, 2013 and succeeded to the ownership transfer and loan by a special agreement with the Defendant as follows: "1. The instant real estate shall be incorporated into a corporate registration and succeeded to the ownership transfer and loan by February 15, 2014," and "4. The legal issues, etc. related to the Plaintiff among the above buildings are responsible for the buyer." Accordingly, according to the above facts, the Defendant and J appears to have agreed to receive the instant land as collateral and to substitute the payment for the purchase price that the Defendant acquired by J.
Therefore, it is deemed that the Defendant also sold the instant land, etc. and received the payment of the purchase price, etc., as collateral, and thus, the above loan is hindered.