beta
Text
1. Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiffs each of KRW 56,750,000, and Defendant from July 12, 2014.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. 1) On September 13, 2013, the Plaintiffs are Defendant E Co., Ltd. (former trade name: H: hereinafter “Defendant E”).
each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “each land of this case”) shall be
(2) The Defendant F, and Defendant G, representing the Plaintiffs on February 24, 2014, agreed to pay the remainder of KRW 50 million and the remainder of KRW 450 million to Defendant E by not later than March 30, 2014, in total, KRW 1 billion as KRW 450 million. Of the down payment, KRW 50 million, the remainder of the down payment and KRW 450 million were to be paid by not later than October 10, 2013. (2) Defendant F, and the remainder of the down payment and KRW 450 million were to be paid to the Plaintiffs, representing the Plaintiffs on February 24, 2014, KRW 270 and KRW 2700,000,000, the remainder of the down payment were to be jointly and severally and severally guaranteed by the Plaintiff.
[Based on the recognition] Defendant E and Defendant F: The judgment deemed as a confession (Article 208(3)2 and Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act)
B. According to the above facts of determination, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay each of the Plaintiffs 56,750,000 won (i.e., 227,000,000 won/ 4) and damages for delay at each rate of 15% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from July 12, 2014, the following day following the final payment of the purchase price, as the Plaintiffs seek, until November 7, 2016, which is apparent in the record that the original copy of the instant payment order, was served on them. Defendant G is liable to pay damages for delay at each rate of 5% per annum as provided by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings until August 2, 2016, which is apparent that the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the above Defendant.
2. Determination as to Defendant G’s assertion
A. As to each land of this case, Defendant E’s summary of the assertion.