beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 27,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from May 20, 2016 to May 1, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 17, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract and its major contents (i) the land indicated in the separate sheet from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant land”).
2) The sales contract to purchase KRW 954,600,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
(2) According to the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff paid each of the Defendant a down payment of KRW 90 million on September 17, 2015, the intermediate payment of KRW 200 million on October 30, 2015, and the remainder of KRW 666,66 million on January 28, 2016. On January 28, 2016, the Plaintiff received documents necessary for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land from the Defendant at the same time as the remainder payment was made, and the instant land was received.
3) In addition, the Plaintiff and the Defendant determined that the instant sales contract shall be the basis for compensation for damages for down payment, unless otherwise agreed upon by either party’s non-performance of obligation. (b) There were multiple graves (hereinafter “instant grave”) prior to the conclusion of the instant sales contract on the instant land (i.e., the special agreement on treatment of a grave and the progress related thereto). The parties concluded the instant sales contract on the premise that the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff the part equivalent to the Defendant’s share of the expenses incurred in the instant land among the expenses incurred in handling the instant grave, even if the said grave was disposed of by the time the remaining payment was made, or the treatment was not completed by the time the grave was not completed.
At the time of consultation for the conclusion of a contract, the Plaintiff anticipated that the cost of disposal of a grave would be required per quarter, and the Defendant demanded the settlement of the cost. However, the Defendant did not consent to the settlement of the cost excessive, and the parties did not agree to the extent to which the cost of disposal of a grave was incurred. However, the terms of the sales contract of this case were 3.