기타(금전)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On December 12, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted, via his agent, through the Plaintiff’s agent C, that two cases of collateral security (hereinafter “each case’s collateral security”) worth KRW 200 million in the Defendant’s respective maximum debt amount of KRW 150 million in the Defendant’s name regarding the Defendant’s real estate owned D (the principal amount of KRW 200 million, interest KRW 4 million per month) and the respective maximum debt amount of KRW 150 million in the Defendant’s name regarding the real estate owned D are transferred to KRW 20 million (hereinafter “instant contract”), and the payment was paid to the Defendant in full.
At the time, Defendant and C could receive at least KRW 250 million dividends from each of the instant collateral security in the real estate auction procedure (F duplicate) for the Busan District Court Support E Real Estate (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), but the actual Plaintiff did not receive any dividends at all.
Since the instant contract was concluded by the public offering of the Defendant and C, it can be revoked pursuant to Article 110(1) of the Civil Act. Even if the said deception was concluded by C, a third party under the contract, the Defendant may have known or could have known such fact. Thus, the instant contract may be revoked pursuant to Article 110(2) of the Civil Act.
In addition, the belief that the Plaintiff’s acquisition of each of the instant collective security rights in KRW 200 million by transfer is able to pay KRW 250 million to KRW 200 million is an error of motive or law in relation to the conclusion of the instant contract. However, in that the instant contract was concluded during the auction procedure, it is sufficient to deem that the said motive is the content of the instant contract as a matter of interpretation of expression of intent, and the said mistake constitutes an error of important part, and thus, the instant contract may be revoked in accordance with Article 109(1) of the Civil Act.
Inasmuch as the application for modification of the purport of the instant claim and the cause of the claim, which contain a declaration of intent to cancel the instant contract, are served on the Defendant, the Defendant shall return KRW 200 million to the Plaintiff and pay damages for delay.