beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. According to the selective claims added by this court, the defendant 4,859.
Reasons
1. On December 15, 2015, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion participated in the bid for the selection of the re-designated land collection company announced by the Defendant and selected as the successful bidder. Around that time, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract for re-collection of land with the content that the Plaintiff would pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 17 million with advance payment or sales price, and that the Plaintiff would collect the amount of KRW 17 million from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016.
After that, the Plaintiff paid KRW 17 million to the Defendant pursuant to the above contract, and collected the land from January 1, 2016 to two months. However, due to the loss or theft of the land due to the Defendant’s neglect in managing the land, the volume of the land to be collected by the Plaintiff was insufficient, and the Plaintiff rescinded the contract on March 18, 2016 on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation as above.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff KRW 4.25 million (i.e., KRW 17 million x 3/12 x 1.7 million x 1.7 million x 1.7%), excluding advance payment or purchase price of KRW 17 million - KRW 4.25 million - KRW 17 million - 1.7 million - 1.7 million - the Defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay.
In addition, the defendant, since April 1, 2016, which was the date when the plaintiff was finally collected, concluded a contract with another company and received the payment from the relevant company, and the defendant concluded a contract with another company to collect the payment in advance or in full, and concluded the contract with the plaintiff and received the payment in duplicate with the other company. Since the defendant's payment in advance or in full was unjust enrichment against the plaintiff, the defendant is obligated to return to the plaintiff the amount equivalent to the amount received in duplicate from the other company as above under the legal principles of unjust enrichment or the principle of good faith, and pay damages for delay.
2. Determination.