logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.10.04 2017나70595
매매대금반환
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified even if each evidence submitted to the court of first instance was presented to this court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following amendments, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of

[Supplementary part] The second part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the second part of the judgment of the court of second instance, "in fact," added the following contents:

Around August 2017, in which the trial is in progress after that, the name of the business entity was changed to the defendant, the site area was 3,256 square meters (a road separate 845 square meters), and the total floor area was changed to 903 square meters, and the approval for change of factory establishment was completed." The "Preparation was completed" in Part 7 of the first judgment of the court of first instance as follows.

The following contents shall be added to the judgment of the first instance court of "(1.3 billion won in preparing the purchase price, preparing a contract in which the purchase price is KRW 1.1 billion, and paying KRW 200 million in terms of the purchase price of tin."

Although the defendant asserts that additional permission to collect earth and stones is possible with the approval of change of factory establishment on August 2017, the change of the area subject to the above approval of change is limited to the division of the permitted area, and there is no difference from the existing area, and it is difficult to view that additional permission to collect earth and stones can be obtained due to the above approval of change)" in Part 1 of Part 4 of the judgment of the first instance, "the fact that it is impossible to collect earth and stones" is "the fact that the approval of factory construction or any other similar permission can not be obtained."

Part 4 of the judgment of the first instance, "after the conclusion of the contract of this case" in Part 2 of the judgment of the second instance shall be construed as "after the conclusion of the contract of this case, it shall not be subject to the approval of factory construction that has been obtained from the

The judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed.

arrow