(a) Where there is an agreement that the contract shall be automatically rescinded if the buyer fails to pay the price by the deadline for payment of the remainder, whether the seller has to provide the buyer with the performance of his/her obligation on the date for payment of the remainder and cause a delay in the performance of the contract for the purpose of automatically cancelling the contract;

B. The case holding that there are special circumstances to deem that a special contract was made to invalidate the contract by itself without asking whether the seller satisfies the documents required for the registration of transfer and whether the buyer's payment deadline and the fact alone, in the event of an agreement as referred to in the above paragraph A

C. The legal relationship where the seller receives part of the remainder on the agreed date of payment of the remainder after the special agreement as referred to in the above Paragraph B is made

A. In a real estate sales contract, even though there is an agreement that the buyer fails to pay the price by the due date, the obligation of the buyer to pay the remainder and the seller's obligation to register ownership transfer has a simultaneous performance relationship, barring any special circumstances, the seller's obligation to pay the remainder and the seller's obligation to register ownership transfer at the due date for the payment of the remainder is terminated automatically only when the seller prepares documents necessary for the registration of ownership transfer on the due date for the payment of the remainder and provides the buyer with performance, thereby making the buyer enter into the buyer's delay of performance, and even if the buyer does not have the due date, the contract is automatically rescinded.

B. The case holding that there are special circumstances to deem that a special contract was made to invalidate the contract by itself without asking whether the seller satisfies the documents required for the registration of transfer and the payment deadline and the fact of the buyer itself in the case where the above agreement was made.

C. In a case where, after the special agreement as referred to in paragraph (b) of the above, the seller did not refuse to pay part of the purchase price on the agreed date of the payment of the purchase price, it is reasonable to deem that there was an agreement between the parties to postpone the payment date of the purchase price, barring any special circumstance. The new payment date of the purchase price has been postponed by the seller's highest date. If the purchaser fails to pay the remainder by the due date, the sales

Article 544 of the Civil Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 79Da661 delivered on October 30, 1979 (Gong1989, 1294) 91Da15614 delivered on July 24, 1992 (Gong1992, 2514) (Gong1992, 2514). Supreme Court Decision 62Da684 delivered on March 7, 1963 (No11?181) 80Da1077 delivered on July 8, 1980 (Gong1980, 13010) (Gong192, 3233)

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 90Na34542 delivered on July 25, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the plaintiff, who is a pastor of the above ○○○○○ church, entered into a sales contract with the above 0th anniversary of the above 9th anniversary of the fact that the above 10th anniversary of the above 9th anniversary of the fact that the above 9th anniversary of the above 10th anniversary of the fact that the above 9th anniversary of the above 1st anniversary of the fact that the above 9th anniversary of the above 9th anniversary of the above 9th anniversary of the above 1st century, the plaintiff would be entitled to purchase the above 1st ○○ church for the non-party 1, the above 9th 6th 1st 2nd 8th 1st 8th 1st 2nd 1st 8th 1st 2nd 2nd 196th 2nd 2nd 16th 2nd 2nd 3th 196th 2nd 2nd 2nd 3th 198th 2nd 16th 2nd 3th 2nd 26th 2nd.

2. On the first ground for appeal

In light of the records, the above fact-finding by the court below that the above non-party 1 was delegated the power of representation to the plaintiff as to the act of the non-party 1 to whom the payment date of the remaining price will be extended and the above contract for the above sale of goods will not be raised even if the contract for the above sale of goods is rescinded. There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the theory of lawsuit, incomplete deliberation, or

3. On the second ground for appeal

In a real estate sales contract, even though there is an agreement that if the buyer fails to pay the price by the due date, the obligation of the buyer to pay the remaining price and the seller's obligation to transfer ownership registration simultaneously are fulfilled, barring any special circumstances, it shall be viewed that the sales contract automatically is terminated only when the seller prepares documents necessary for the registration of transfer of ownership on the due date for payment and provides the buyer with performance, such as informing the buyer of the performance, and makes the buyer enter into the delay of performance, and even if the buyer fails to pay the due date, the contract cannot be automatically terminated at the due date (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 8Da28891, Jul. 25, 1989; 79Da661, Oct. 30, 1979).

However, if the facts of this case are as determined by the court below, it is acceptable that the court below recognized the invalidation of the sales contract of this case with the purport that the defendant did not ask whether or not the defendant has the documents required for the registration of transfer, and there are special circumstances to deem that the defendant had made a special agreement to invalidate the contract only by itself with the plaintiff's payment deadline (the removal of a certificate of seal imprint for ordinary sale is not so difficult, and the defendant, at the request of the plaintiff on September 12, 198, removed a certificate of seal imprint for real estate sale made by the plaintiff as a collateral and accompanied by the bond company office by the plaintiff).

However, if the Defendant did not refuse to pay part of the remainder on September 2 of the same year, which is the agreed payment date, as stated in its holding, it is reasonable to interpret that there was an agreement between the parties to postpone the payment date, barring any special circumstances. The payment date is extended by September 17 of the same year by the peremptory notice issued by the Defendant on September 13 of the same year, and the above sales contract is deemed null and void due to the Plaintiff’s failure to pay the remainder by the due date. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, although it was justified in its conclusion that the above sales contract was invalidated on September 2 of the same year.

There is no reason to discuss this issue.

4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)