logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.12.09 2016나2006017
매매대금반환 등 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

However, with regard to the new and repeated arguments raised by the plaintiff at the trial, the following judgments are added.

2. Determination of the attached articles

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Article 6 of the sales contract of this case provides grounds for cancellation different from those stipulated in Article 5, and the Defendants, at the time of the conclusion of the sales contract of this case, refer to the land subject to sale and purchase for convenience, although the land was not partitioned at the time when the Plaintiff entered into the sales contract of this case for the purpose of constructing a house for the purpose of constructing a house for electric use, and the special terms and conditions of the sales contract of this case stipulate the obligation to remove graves for Defendant B and C, it is reasonable to deem that Article 6 of the sales contract of this case is a provision stipulating the right to cancel the contract for all nonperformance, including the Plaintiff and Defendant B and C’s default of incidental obligations. The failure of the Plaintiff to perform the duty to remove graves constitutes grounds for cancellation of the contract under Article 6 of the sales contract of this case, and thus, the sales contract of this case was lawfully rescinded by the delivery of a copy of the complaint indicating the Plaintiff’s intent to exercise the right to cancel the contract of this case.

The principal obligation of Defendant B and C, as a grave, shall be fulfilled.

arrow