logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원고등법원 2020.11.05 2020나12741
계약금반환 등 청구의 소
Text

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added or emphasized the following "2. Additional determination" as to the assertion added or emphasized by the court of first instance. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Additional determination

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff prepared to borrow money at any time from a person with sufficient financial resources to pay the balance on the outstanding payment date under the instant sales contract, but the Defendant was obligated to provide the Plaintiff with a prior consent to land use and a certificate of seal impression so that it can receive government subsidies, but the Defendant’s failure to perform such prior payment was delayed due to the Defendant’s failure to perform such prior payment obligations. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s failure to pay the remainder was justified, and the Defendant’s ground for rescission

B. As alleged by the Plaintiff, the mere fact that the Plaintiff had been able to borrow any balance from a person with financial capacity at any time is insufficient to deem that there was a provision for the payment of the balance, and even if considering the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, the Defendant agreed to first deliver a written consent to land use and a certificate of personal seal impression.

or the defendant cannot be deemed to have rejected such request of the plaintiff.

Therefore, we cannot accept the Plaintiff’s above assertion based on the premise that the Defendant bears the duty of preferential performance as alleged by the Plaintiff.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow