logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.07.23 2014가합519516
원상회복 등 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 3,100,000,000 to the Plaintiff; and (b) 5% per annum from November 28, 2012 to April 8, 2014 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3-1, 2, 7, and 6 and 7 of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3-1, 7, and 6 and 7 of the facts charged.

1) On November 28, 2012, the Plaintiff’s 4 points, including C’s “D” and E’s “F,” etc. from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant art works”).

3,10,000,000 won was purchased, and the Defendant agreed to deliver the real property of the instant art to the Plaintiff within November 201, 2012 and pay the price to the Plaintiff simultaneously (hereinafter the above sales contract is referred to as “instant sales contract”).

(2) On November 28, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 3,100,000 to the Defendant, but the Defendant did not deliver the actual object of the instant art.

3) On February 17, 2014, the Plaintiff requested confirmation as to at any time whether an employee of the K non-investment securities company operated by the Defendant could deliver the instant art product to G in charge of transaction-related affairs between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, such as the instant sales contract. As to this request, G confirmed that “The instant art product may be requested, but at any time, E’s present E’s sale may not be delivered until the closing of the exhibition, because it is a loan at the exhibition, and if the Plaintiff wishes to show the instant art product to a purchaser candidate or broker after receiving the instant art product, he/she shall not be given prior consent.” (iv) On March 3, 2014, the Plaintiff provided that G would pay KRW 3,100,000 for the instant art product price to the Plaintiff or immediately deliver the instant art product without any separate condition.

5 On March 18, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that “The instant sales contract shall be rescinded, as the Plaintiff requested the delivery of the instant art product over several times, but not until now,” and the said notification.

arrow