소유권말소등기
1. The Defendant shall pay to each of the Plaintiffs KRW 75 million and the interest rate of KRW 15 percent per annum from November 10, 2018 to the date of full payment.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 192, 192, the Plaintiff’s father D entered into a real estate sales contract with the Defendant’s spouse He (the deceased D punishment) and with the Defendant’s spouse E (the deceased D punishment) and with the Defendant’s 1038 square meters in Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu (hereinafter “instant land”) for KRW 70 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The Plaintiff paid KRW 40 million out of the above sales price to the deceased E.
B. The deceased on August 7, 2009, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land due to inheritance by consultation and division on September 1, 2009.
C. The network D died on August 31, 2017, and his heir is the Plaintiffs, and the inheritance shares are 1/2, respectively.
On March 15, 2018, the Defendant sold the instant land in KRW 180 million to G, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 28, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 12, 17 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. In determining the cause of claim, where a seller has already sold the object to another person and passed the registration of ownership transfer to a third person notwithstanding the seller's duty to transfer it to another person, barring special circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the seller's obligation to register ownership transfer to another person is in the status of impossibility of performance (see Supreme Court Decision 80Da1416, Mar. 22, 1983). The scope of liability for compensatory damages due to nonperformance of a sales contract should be based on the market price of the object of sale at the time of impossibility of performance, and the amount equivalent to such market price shall be considered as ordinary damages.
(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da20163 delivered on May 27, 1993). Examining the above facts in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the instant sales contract became impossible by the Defendant to complete the registration of transfer of ownership by selling the instant land to G. Accordingly, the Defendant did not have any special circumstances.