(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.07.05 2017가합110548

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) 서울동부지방법원 2018.07.05 2017가합110548

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. On July 22, 2015, the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) where the Plaintiff pays the Defendant a down payment of KRW 18 billion, one hundred and eight million, out of the purchase price of KRW 1.08 million, the Defendant drafted and provided a letter of undertaking to conclude a sales contract with the Plaintiff on each of the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant letter of undertaking”); (b) on August 1, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited the Defendant as the principal deposit and deposited the down payment of KRW 18 million.

Therefore, since a sales contract for each of the instant real estate was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer for each of the instant real estate and deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff.

B. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 16 of the judgment, it is recognized that the Defendant prepared and executed the instant promise to enter into a sales contract for each real estate of this case, in which the Plaintiff was paid the down payment of KRW 18 million from the Plaintiff around July 22, 2015, and the Plaintiff was paid the down payment of KRW 18 million from the Plaintiff.

However, when the Defendant receives a down payment from the Plaintiff, it is merely an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to conclude a sales contract for each of the instant real estate. Since the Defendant cannot be deemed to have concluded a sales contract for each of the instant real estate because it received a down payment, the fact of recognition alone is insufficient to recognize that a sales contract for each of the instant real estate was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. The Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit, as there is no evidence to

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2018.05.18 2017나5417

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2019.11.27. 선고 2019가단73198 판결

-울산지방법원 2016.09.22 2016나80

-의정부지방법원 2018.10.25 2018가단110363

-인천지방법원 2020.01.22 2018나57110