beta
Text
1. Defendant C: (a) 13,00,000 won for the Plaintiff (Appointed Party); (b) 6,000,000 won for the appointed parties D; and (c) 25,000 won for the appointed parties E and F, respectively.
Reasons
Basic Facts
Defendant B is the owner of the funeral ginseng (hereinafter “instant funeral ginseng”) that was planted on the ground of Taean-gun J land (hereinafter “instant site”).
On November 2018 through December 2018, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties (hereinafter “Plaintiffs, etc.”) entered into a sales contract with Defendant C to purchase the seedlings equivalent to KRW 13,00,000 in the purchase price; KRW 6,00,00 in the purchase price; KRW 6,000 in the case of SelectionD; KRW 25,00,000 in the purchase price; KRW 20,000 in the case of Selections E and F; KRW 20,000 in the purchase price; KRW 30,00,000 in each purchase price; and KRW Selection to purchase the seedlings equivalent to KRW 30,000,00 in the purchase price (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
Plaintiff
Between November 10, 2018 and December 17, 2018, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) paid each purchase price of KRW 13,000,000 to Defendant C, and KRW 6,000,000 to Appointers D, KRW 25,000,000 to Appointers E, and KRW 25,000,000 to Appointers G, and KRW 20,000 to SH, respectively, and KRW 30,000 to Appointers.
Plaintiff
On March 6, 2019, Defendant C entered the instant site to receive the instant seed ginseng, but did not receive the instant seed ginseng due to Defendant B’s lower judgment.
Accordingly, on March 6, 2019, the Plaintiff et al. concluded a sales contract with Defendant B to purchase the instant funeral ginseng in total of KRW 110,000,000 between the purchase price and Defendant B. On the same day, the Plaintiff et al. paid the above purchase price to Defendant B, and received delivery of the instant funeral ginseng from Defendant B.
【In the absence of any dispute, the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the claim against Defendant B as a member of an association with Defendant C, of which the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the existence of any dispute, as to Gap’s evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 3, Eul’s evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 8, Eul’s evidence of subparagraphs 1 and 2 (including each number in case of additional number), and the purport of the entire pleading.