beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff’s letter of payment written on July 2014 for the purchase and sale of forest land against the Defendant, Jin-si C, and D, 7,77.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff, as the owner of the forest land C and D (hereinafter “the forest of this case”), asked the Defendant, who is bound to sell and purchase the forest of this case, to perform the instant forest within six months. Accordingly, around July 2014, the Plaintiff was issued a written notice of trust for the purchase and sale of the forest of this case and issued a written notice of trust for the purchase and sale of the forest of this case, and the Defendant was able to purchase and sell the forest of this case after receiving more than three billion won. However, the Plaintiff was issued a written notice of payment (hereinafter “written notice of payment”).
B. On December 2015, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that the instant notice of payment became invalid on the ground that the instant notice of payment was not concluded, and the instant notice of payment was not concluded until now.
【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings】
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to pay KRW 77,777,777 to the Defendant in return for the Defendant’s non-speed Doctrine to pay KRW 77,777, on the condition that the sales contract for the forest of this case should be more than KRW 3 billion within 6 months from the date of the preparation of the instant payment memorandum, and as long as the contract for the forest of this case was not concluded during the above period, it is reasonable to view that the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant became null and void as the condition of suspension becomes void.
Therefore, there is no obligation of KRW 77,777,777 based on the instant payment memorandum against the Defendant, and as long as the Defendant contests this, there is a benefit of confirmation.
B. As to this, the Defendant did not specify the condition within six months at the time of the preparation of the instant payment memorandum, and if the purchaser of the instant forest appears, the Plaintiff.