(영문) 창원지방법원마산지원 2017.12.12 2017가단3447

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) 창원지방법원마산지원 2017.12.12 2017가단3447

청구이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 24, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit of KRW 80,000,000 (a deposit of KRW 11,000,000 on the contractual date and the balance of KRW 69,00,000 on the contractual date, and the period from July 10, 2014 to July 10, 2016) with respect to the E 1st floor in Chang-si, Changwon-si (hereinafter “instant building”).

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The Defendant paid the Plaintiff the down payment of KRW 11 million on the contract date of the instant case, and KRW 9 million out of the remainder on June 26, 2014, and KRW 20 million in total.

C. On April 4, 2017, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming payment of KRW 20 million (Seoul District Court Decision 2017Hu1010), and the payment order issued on April 25, 2017 by the said court was finalized as it is.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant payment order”). [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence (including serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The purport of the parties’ assertion is that the Defendant concluded with the Plaintiff and the instant contract were rescinded and returned KRW 20 million indicated in the instant payment order due to restitution to its original state.

The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Defendant renounced the said KRW 20 million pursuant to Article 6 of the instant contract (the lessor may repay the down payment before the lessee pays the intermediate payment to the lessor, and the lessee may waive the down payment and rescind the contract).

3. In full view of the statement Nos. 1 and 2 of the judgment and the purport of the entire argument in witness D’s testimony, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to repair the defect of the instant building immediately after concluding the instant contract. For this reason, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to rescind the instant contract, and the Plaintiff sent text messages to the Defendant to the effect that “the Plaintiff would return money in return to the Defendant for the lease of the instant building” several times.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.07.21 2016가합200730

-인천지방법원 2015.02.11 2014가단18956

-전주지방법원정읍지원 2016.11.17 2016가단1739

-춘천지방법원 2018.10.17 2016가단54165

-수원지방법원 2015.05.21 2014나43189