Cases where the estimated amount of damage compensation is unreasonable;

1.40,000 won of the purchase price and the total sum of 5.7 million won and the total sum of 3.1 million won and the total sum of 1.1 million won and 1.1 million won cannot be paid on the agreed date, and it is unreasonable for the purchaser to have agreed to accept the collateral and the repayment obligation of the deposit for lease on a deposit with the purchaser, but it is unreasonable

Article 398 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 75Na1404 Delivered on November 11, 1975

Plaintiff (Attorney Lee Jae-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant (Attorney Choi Jong-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

may 21, 1975

Gwangju District Court Decision 74Gahap308 delivered on March 18, 1975

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant revoked the part of the judgment against the defendant ordering the plaintiff to pay 440,000 won with an annual interest rate of 5% from September 12, 1974 to the full payment, and dismissed the plaintiff's claim as to that part.

2. The defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed.

3. All the costs of lawsuit shall be divided into two parts of the first and second trials, one of which shall be borne by the plaintiff and the remainder shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 840,00 and the amount at the rate of five percent per annum from the next day of service soar to the completion of the service.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff in the first and second instances.

The plaintiff, on March 21, 197, received 30,000 won for the above 40,000 won for the above 70,000 won for the above 10,000 won for the above 40,00 won for the above 70,000 won for the above 40,000 won for the above 10,000 won for the above 10,000 won for the real estate, and 15,5,000 won for the house for 1,50,000 won for 5,000,000 won for the above 40,000 won for the above 7,000 won for the above 5,00 won for the real estate, and the remaining 0,000 won for the 1,000,000 won for the above 40,000 won for the above 1,000 won for the real estate, and the other 1,000,003,000 won for the above 2.

In light of the Plaintiff’s economic condition and the circumstances leading up to the conclusion of the above sales contract, the Plaintiff’s attorney agreed to give up KRW 1,140,00 that the Plaintiff agreed to give up the above additional contract. As such, the Plaintiff’s attorney demanded reduction of KRW 300,000, which was already paid out of KRW 1,140,000 as stated in the initial contract prior to the additional contract, to obtain KRW 300,00,000 from the Defendant’s 1,40,000, which had not been paid out of KRW 30,00,000, which had not been paid out of KRW 60,00,000, which had not been paid out of KRW 30,000,000, which had not been paid out of KRW 6,00,00,000, which had already been paid out of KRW 80,000,000,000 for the above additional contract, the Plaintiff’s allegation that the Plaintiff would not be 1 and 2,0,0,0.

Therefore, in light of the above facts of recognition, KRW 1,140,00, which has been agreed as the estimated amount of damages under this case's sales contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, shall be excessive in light of the above circumstances, so it is reasonable to reduce it. Accordingly, the scope of reduction shall be KRW 700,000,000 shall be reasonable.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 440,000 won to the plaintiff with 5% annual interest rate from September 12, 1974 to the full payment rate, since 440,000 won of the 1,140,000 won already paid, which was deducted from 700,000 won from 70,000 won of the 1,000 won already paid, was benefiting without legal grounds after the rescission of the sales contract. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff money at the rate of 5% per annum from September 12, 1974 to the 4,000 won of the 1,140,000 won and the remaining part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which differs from this, shall be accepted within the above recognized limit, and the defendant's remaining appeal against the defendant exceeding the scope of ordering the payment of 5% per annum from September 12, 1974 to the full payment rate is dismissed, and all of the costs of appeal are dismissed.

June 19, 1975

Judges Kim Jae-ju (Presiding Judge) Yang Young-tae Kim