(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.07.18 2017나25550

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 2018.07.18 2017나25550

계약금배액상환

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. On March 1, 2017, the Plaintiff agreed to purchase the land C, D, and E (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from the Defendant for KRW 40 million and to pay the remainder KRW 36 million to the Plaintiff on March 30, 2017.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On March 1, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 4 million pursuant to the instant sales contract. On March 26, 2017, the Defendant unilaterally notified the Plaintiff of the cancellation of the instant sales contract without any justifiable reason, and only the down payment of KRW 4 million was returned to the Plaintiff.

Article 6 of the sales contract of this case provides that unless there is a separate agreement as to the damages, the contract deposit shall be deemed as the basis for damages. Since the defendant unilaterally defaulted on the obligation pursuant to the sales contract of this case, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the damages amounting to four million won in addition to the contract deposit already returned to the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant did not conclude a sales contract with the Plaintiff for the instant real estate.

The defendant first regards the real estate sales contract (Evidence A No. 1) submitted by the plaintiff, and denies the authenticity of the above document.

The seller of the above real estate sales contract states that the defendant's agent F is the seller of the above real estate sales contract, and the defendant does not delegate his/her authority to dispose of the real estate of this case to any other person. Since the above real estate sales contract is a document prepared by a unauthorized agent, the contract was not concluded between the plaintiff

On March 2, 2017, the Defendant received KRW 3.5 million from G to the account, and returned it again on March 27, 2017.

However, this fact is that the Defendant entered into a sales contract for the instant real estate in March 27, 2017 and received the down payment.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.09 2017가단5153410

-대전지방법원 2019.07.10 2018나12498

-서울서부지방법원 2016.11.24 2016가단26559

-부산지방법원 2016.08.11 2016노587

-대전지방법원 2021.01.28 2020나113172