beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 636,036,708 with respect to the Plaintiff and the period from June 20, 2018 to September 14, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. (1) On October 16, 2013, the Plaintiff and Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) purchased each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from KRW 1,230,00,000 (i.e., land price of KRW 825,658,912) (i.e., KRW 404,341,088), and Defendant B concluded a contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B to construct the instant real estate as a factory site and obtain authorization and permission (hereinafter “instant contract”) by December 31, 2013.
(A) (Nos. 1, 2, and 4). (2) The Plaintiff paid the price for the instant contract to the Defendant B, including the cost of civil construction of KRW 404,341,08.
B. Although the performance agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B entered into force on December 31, 2013, Defendant B failed to perform the duty to construct the instant real estate as a factory site, and the Plaintiff agreed on around April 2014 with the Defendants and Nonparty D (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”) that: (a) the Defendant et al. changed the instant real estate, which is a conservation management area, as of June 30, 2014, into a planned control area; (b) the construction of the factory site as of June 30, 2014; (c) the interest expenses incurred by the Plaintiff following the delay in the construction of the factory site were compensated by the Defendant et al.; and (c) if the Defendant et al. violated the above duty, the Plaintiff shall pay 10% of the purchase price as penalty; and (d) the Plaintiff shall be liable for damages, etc. due to property decline caused by the violation, etc.
(hereinafter “instant performance agreement”). Some provisions of the instant performance agreement are as follows:
(A) The terms, conditions, and details of the implementation of the agreement under Article 3.3. The defendant et al. promised to alter the area and district of the factory site (a planned management area) and the building and delivery of the factory site by December 31, 2013, and the plaintiff extended it several times until now, and affixed it.