beta
Text
1. The defendant, from the plaintiff, on the building stated in the attached list, the Seoul Northern District Court, Dongdaemun-gu Registry of the Seoul Northern District Court, July 1990.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On March 31, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant with respect to the instant building owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
The price: The intermediate payment of KRW 19.2.5 million: The remainder payment of KRW 38.5 million on May 14, 2010: the special agreement to pay on July 1, 2010: the defendant succeeds to the lease contract of the building of this case and deducts the deposit of KRW 44.5 million from the purchase price.
The sum of the maximum debt amount of the 2nd mortgage established on the instant building is KRW 29,90,000,000,000.
B. The Plaintiff received KRW 57,750,000 from the Defendant after the instant sales contract, but did not cancel the two collateral security (the maximum debt amount shall be KRW 16,90,000,000,000) established on the instant building until the remainder payment date, respectively, and the Defendant did not pay the remainder.
C. Since then, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the Defendant seeking payment of the remainder of KRW 9,750,000 ( KRW 192,500,000 - KRW 57,750,000 - KRW 444,00,000), excluding the lease deposit amount of KRW 44,750,000, which the Seoul Central District Court decided to deduct the Defendant from the above purchase-price as Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Da1040, Nov. 30, 201, the Plaintiff was sentenced that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 9,755,00 and the amount of money calculated at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from November 17, 2011 to the date of full payment,” and the above judgment was finalized on February 9, 2012.
Even after the instant sales contract was concluded, the Plaintiff paid various taxes, etc. on the instant building.
E. Meanwhile, on April 1, 2017, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Intervenor joining the Defendant to transfer “the Defendant’s right to claim for the return of the purchase price that the Defendant had against the Plaintiff due to the rescission of the instant sales contract,” and the Plaintiff around that time.