(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.06.10 2020가단511330

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.06.10 2020가단511330

채무부존재확인

Text

The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is paid KRW 81,000,000 from the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) at the same time.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 20, 2019, the Plaintiff sold real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant apartment”) to the Defendant for price of KRW 395 million.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The instant sales contract includes the following:

-Article 5 (Cancellation of Contract), Section 5 (Cancellation on March 31, 2020), the seller shall reimburse the sum of the down payment to the seller before the buyer pays the intermediate payment (if there is no intermediate payment), and the buyer may waive the down payment and rescind this contract by giving up the down payment.

B. On December 16, 2019, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 5 million (provisional contract deposit) and KRW 35 million on the day of the instant sales contract, and paid KRW 10 million on February 6, 2020.

C. On February 20, 2020, the Plaintiff sent the Defendant’s account number to the effect that “The Plaintiff will cancel the instant sales contract. It would transfer the amount of down payment and the total of KRW 90 million paid on February 6, 2020,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000).”

On the other hand, the defendant refused the plaintiff's request as "the defendant started the performance and notified the cancellation to the plaintiff." Thus, the defendant refused the plaintiff's request by "the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership of the apartment in this case

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with a double amount of the down payment prior to the payment of the remainder pursuant to Article 5 of the instant sales contract, and cancelled the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the existence of the obligation against the Defendant, as stated in paragraph (1)

The defendant is prior to the plaintiff's declaration of intention for cancellation.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원안산지원 2019.04.24 2018가단65692

-수원지방법원 2020.07.14 2020가단510115

-수원지방법원안산지원 2019.06.12 2018가단16461

-대구지방법원김천지원 2016.06.16 2016가단1461

-수원지방법원 2020.09.16 2020가단524626