(영문) 울산지방법원 2014.12.17 2014가단9662

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) 울산지방법원 2014.12.17 2014가단9662

소유권이전등기

Text

1. As to the real estate stated in the attached list to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is based on sale on November 9, 201.

Reasons

1. The facts are as follows: (a) the Defendant’s written contract for the sale of each real estate (hereinafter “instant apartment”) listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant contract for sale in lots”) signed and sealed the Defendant’s seal impression in the seller column and delivered the buyer column to Nonparty D and C; (b) the Plaintiff had loan claims against Nonparty D and E; (c) on November 9, 201, C provided the Plaintiff with the instant apartment contract for payment in lieu of KRW 200 million; (d) in the event it is impossible to repay the loan obligations to the Plaintiff, and (e) provided the Plaintiff with the instant apartment contract for payment in substitutes; (e) thereafter, C did not dispute between the parties to the contract for sale in lots and completed the contract by entering the Plaintiff in the buyer column; or (e) it is recognized in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as stated in the evidence No. 1-1 and No. 2.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserted that the contract of this case was valid since the contract of this case was concluded with C delegated by the defendant to conclude the contract of this case.

Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the contract of this case was provided as security for lending KRW 300 million from C, and there was no delegation of the contract of this case.

According to the above facts, the defendant's delivery of the contract for sale in this case to C, which is a co-contractor, appears to have delegated the conclusion of the contract for sale in this case, and the plaintiff seems to have concluded the contract for sale in this case retroactively upon completion of the contract for sale in this case, and as long as the contract for sale in this case was concluded under the private law as it was concluded under the contract for sale in this case, the plaintiff can exercise its rights based on the contract for sale in this case.

Therefore, the defendant is based on the sale of the apartment of this case to the plaintiff on November 9, 201.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.06.01 2015가단23533

-서울남부지방법원 2020.02.27 2019가단207022

-서울남부지방법원 2020.09.10 2018나69347

-대전지방법원 홍성지원 2018.10.02 2017가단5686