beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 and its amount annually from January 8, 2015 to December 22, 2015 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the Parties:
On March 10, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) sold the instant shopping district to the Defendant at KRW 143,986,00 (28,797,200 for the first intermediate payment of KRW 28,797,200 for the first intermediate payment of KRW 28,797,200 for the second intermediate payment of KRW 43,195,80 for the remainder of KRW 43,195,800 for the second intermediate payment of KRW 43,195,80 for the second intermediate payment of KRW 43,195,80 for the remainder of KRW 5,118,050 from the date of the completion of the registration of the Plaintiff; (b) leased the instant shopping district to a third party on the condition that the lease period may be sub-lease; and (c) paid KRW 30,000 for the contract deposit, etc. to the Defendant.
B. On the other hand, around November 18, 2013, the Defendant and Thai L&C Co., Ltd set up and leased 68 commercial buildings (24 Co., Ltd., and 44) the size of which is similar to that of the 10th floor of the instant building (40,000,000, monthly rent of 11,000,000 (11,170,000, 200), including the instant commercial buildings, to E as of December 31, 2015, respectively, and the instant commercial buildings are currently used as household stores.
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The market price of the commercial building in this case is about KRW 20 million to KRW 30 million. The rent which can be received from the commercial building in this case is about KRW 150,00,000. Although the commercial building in this case including the commercial building in this case is almost impossible to conduct normal transactions, the Defendant sold the commercial building in this case to the Plaintiff at KRW 143,986,00, and through the commercial building in this case, the Defendant can obtain rent of at least KRW 118,050 per month, and the Plaintiff could enjoy considerable profit from the commercial building in this case. Since the Plaintiff concluded the sales contract and the lease contract in this case due to mistake, the sales contract and the lease contract in this case are concluded.