logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 원주지원 2018.07.05 2017가합6036
매매대금반환
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 173,00,000 to the Plaintiffs, and as to this, from May 30, 2017 to March 14, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 29, 2016, the Plaintiffs concluded a sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with Defendant E to purchase the land located in the Won-si (hereinafter “instant land”) at KRW 274,000,000 (i.e., down payment of KRW 135,000,000,000).

B. The Plaintiffs paid Defendant E a down payment of KRW 135,00,000 on August 29, 2016, and KRW 138,000,000 remaining on May 30, 2017 (the first balance of KRW 139,000,000 at KRW 1,00,000) respectively.

C. The Plaintiffs complained against Defendant C and D as a crime of fraud.

On December 7, 2017, Defendant C and D returned KRW 100,000,000, out of the purchase price received from the Plaintiffs according to the instant sales contract, in criminal conciliation proceedings.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6, 7, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendants asserted that in the criminal conciliation proceedings on December 7, 2017, Defendant C and D agreed to withdraw the instant lawsuit by paying KRW 100,000 to the Plaintiffs, and that the Plaintiff agreed to withdraw the instant lawsuit.

According to the purport of the evidence No. 1 and the whole pleadings, Defendant C and D paid KRW 100,000 to the plaintiffs. However, the above facts alone are insufficient to recognize that the plaintiffs agreed to withdraw the lawsuit of this case in receipt of the payment of KRW 100,000 from Defendant C and D, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the main defense of the Defendants is without merit.

3. Judgment on the plaintiffs' primary claims against the defendants

A. In full view of the following circumstances, whether liability for damages was established or not based on Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 7, 10 through 14, and 16, Defendant D and C did not notify the plaintiffs of the major matters regarding the instant sales contract or talking about false facts.

arrow