logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.25 2015가합546119
매매대금
Text

1. The Defendants shall be jointly and severally liable:

A. The Plaintiff A’s KRW 640,070,000 and its related thereto from June 1, 201 to March 25, 2016.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiffs and C are those who jointly own or independently own each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), including 3,478 square meters in the wife population D (hereinafter “D”), in the city of Chungcheongnam-si. On May 10, 2010, at the time of the Defendants’ agreement, established for the purpose of real estate sales business, etc., the trade name of Defendant Boyang C&A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Boyang”) was Epid Co., Ltd. and was changed to the trade name on March 9, 2011.

The term "the building of the defendant" is "the building of the defendant without distinction before and after the change."

Of each real estate of this case, the Plaintiff and H jointly owned a 2,162 square meters and G 3,852 square meters of all or part of the shares of the Plaintiffs and C, which were the real estate of this case. However, the Plaintiff sold only the shares owned by the Plaintiff A to the Defendants. Based on the price per unit area (3.5 million won per square meter), the sales amount was KRW 4.2 billion of the sales amount was sold to the Defendants.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract.” In this case, the Defendants paid the said sales price by dividing it into KRW 1 and secondary sites between the Plaintiffs and C, and the Defendants paid KRW 400 million to the remainder KRW 2 billion until August 31, 2010 when entering into a contract, and paid KRW 500 million until September 30, 2010, and the remainder KRW 1.3 billion until December 31, 2010.

On the other hand, the subject matter of the instant sales was included in the “I had the 67.90 square meters of a single-story roof housing,” but at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the parties to the sales agreed that the price of the above single-story housing is nonexistent. Accordingly, in calculating the sales price, the area of the above single-story housing was not included in the area of the above multi-story housing, and only the total area of the real estate was calculated based on

The Plaintiffs, from November 201 to December 201, 201, pursuant to the instant sales contract, were the Defendants with respect to their respective shares of ownership of each of the instant real estate except F land among the instant real estate.

arrow