beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 250,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from March 22, 2018 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The Plaintiff was the owner of Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D major 508 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). On October 6, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant land on the grounds of sale and purchase on September 7, 2010. On October 13, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer from E with the maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million.
On the instant land, the Defendant was a constructor who constructed an urban-type residential house on the first and seventh ground level. On May 11, 2011, the Defendant agreed with the Plaintiff to change the Plaintiff’s right to collateral security regarding the instant land from the second to the third order. In return, the Defendant prepared a “written confirmation” that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 350 million to the Plaintiff.
This letter of confirmation states that KRW 250 million, out of KRW 350 million, shall be paid up to May 12, 201, while KRW 100 million shall be paid up to June 11, 201.
The Plaintiff, according to the agreement with the Defendant, cancelled the registration of establishment of a second-class mortgage on the instant land, and completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage at the third-class order. The Defendant paid only KRW 100 million out of the amount agreed upon to the Plaintiff, which is KRW 350 million.
【In the absence of dispute, the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the entire pleadings and the purport of the entire pleadings against the Defendant is seeking payment of the agreed amount of KRW 350 million, which was not paid out of the agreed amount of KRW 350 million as of May 11, 201, and damages for delay.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit identical to the case in this case and terminated by the declaration of termination of the lawsuit.
The plaintiff may appeal and appeal against it. Thus, it is unlawful to re-appeal the lawsuit in this case.
The res judicata effect of a final and conclusive judgment on the previous defense in this case is the conclusion of the judgment on the existence of legal relations asserted as a subject matter of lawsuit.