beta
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 reasoning of this court’s acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where the defendant determines as to the assertion added or emphasized by this court, and thus, it is citing it as is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4
2. Additional determination
A. Defendant’s assertion 1) On March 11, 2002, the Defendant was already registered as the owner in the register of land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay of the C Union. Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the president of the C Union to the J and agreed on the instant agreement, to additionally pay KRW 100 million for a zone (land usage fee) where there is no obligation to pay other than the instant purchase price. The part of the said zone should be revoked by deception. Therefore, the Defendant’s payment to the Plaintiff is limited to KRW 180,000,000 and KRW 230,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 and KRW 180,0000,000.
Therefore, the Defendant is not obliged to pay the Plaintiff the transfer money due to the above assignment of claims.
3) Although it is necessary to adopt a general meeting resolution with respect to the assignment of claims between C and the Plaintiff, the assignment of claims is null and void without a general meeting resolution, etc. Therefore, the Defendant is not obliged to pay the Plaintiff the transfer money due to the said assignment of claims. However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively considering the entries of subparagraphs 1 and 7 as well as the overall purport of the arguments and the facts and evidence as seen earlier, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the J made the instant consultation by deceiving the Defendant, and there
In addition, the instant consultations are a single legal act in which the entire amount was economically and factually integrated, and it appears that C Union would have not intended the instant consultations without the existence of KRW 100 million in the name of the land. Therefore, only the portion paid in the area of KRW 100 million shall be removed separately.