logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.11.02 2016가합54377
매매대금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary claim against the defendants is dismissed.

2. The Defendants jointly share the Plaintiff KRW 6,132,050.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 16, 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with Defendant C, who was represented by Defendant B, to purchase D apartment 103 and 1705 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) for KRW 275,00,00 from the window of Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Defendant B (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

On June 9, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant apartment and received the instant apartment from Defendant B around that time.

B. Since then, on August 2014, the Plaintiff leased the instant apartment, and around August 2014, the Plaintiff talked that water sand sand is in the dwelling space.

As a result of the confirmation by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff immediately resisted the Defendants that water leakage occurred in the living room of the apartment of this case, and on August 19, 2014, Defendant C prepared and sent to the Plaintiff a letter stating that “I would resolve the water leakage of the apartment of this case by December 31, 2015” (hereinafter “each letter of this case”).

C. The Defendants requested the council of occupants’ representatives of the instant apartment to construct the repair works for the water leakage of the living room of the instant apartment, and the council of occupants’ representatives determined that the water leakage of the living room of the instant apartment was due to the water leakage of the rooftop, which is the common section for common use, and implemented waterproof construction to prevent the water leakage of the living room of the instant apartment from the end of May to the beginning of June, 2015.

Since the implementation of the relevant waterproof Construction, water leakage occurred again from September 2016, since the fact that water leakage was not generated in the living room of the apartment of this case.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4 (including virtual number), Eul's 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The primary claim is filed with respect to Defendant B, and the sales contract of this case was revoked or cancelled on the grounds as set forth below, and the Defendant B returned unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff.

arrow