(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.06.25 2014가합4433

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) 대전지방법원 2015.06.25 2014가합4433

공사대금 등

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 192,460,00 for Plaintiff B and 5% per annum from January 28, 2015 to June 25, 2015, respectively.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 30, 201, Plaintiff A and the Defendant entered into a sales contract to sell the amount of KRW 315 million (the contract amount of KRW 40 million, intermediate payment of KRW 75 million, and the balance of KRW 200 million) of KRW 15 million (the contract amount of KRW 40 million, the intermediate payment of KRW 75 million, and the remainder of KRW 200 million) with the Defendant’s acquisition of collateral security obligations (the Plaintiff’s obligation to repay loans to Jiil Agricultural Cooperative) established on the instant land or to substitute the payment of the remainder of the purchase price for the remainder.

The defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of the defendant on July 29, 2011.

B. On June 30, 201, Plaintiff B and the Defendant concluded a construction contract for the construction of a building on the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”) with the Defendant to conclude a new construction contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant, and the construction cost agreed to preferentially appropriate the lease deposit and rent that the Defendant gains by leasing the completed building after the completion of construction work, and pay the balance thereof to the Defendant.

Plaintiff

B completed the instant building around the end of December 201 and delivered it to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1 (name of "real estate sales contract and buyer's "C" after the name of "Defendant C" is presumed to be the authenticity of the entire document because there is no dispute over the fact that the above document was forged. The defendant defense to the effect that the above document was forged, but the testimony of the witness F is not sufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to recognize it), Gap evidence No. 2, construction work contract, and construction client's name after the defendant's "C" is presumed to be the authenticity of the entire document, and the authenticity of the document is presumed to be established as the whole because

The defendant defenses to the effect that the above document was forged, but the witness F.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.02.05 2014가단31753

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.09 2015나29304

-의정부지방법원 2017.10.27 2016가합56509

-대전지방법원 2020.09.09 2020가단3939

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2016.01.12 2015나5245