logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.13 2016가단5063107
매매대금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 15, 2005, the non-party B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) entered into a credit transaction agreement of KRW 3 billion under the name of a discount bill loan for the purpose of raising the purchase price of land outside D and 61 parcels of land from Samsung Mutual Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the savings bank of this case”) for the purpose of raising the sales price of land outside D and 61 parcels of land in the instant case.

B. B entered into a credit transaction agreement of KRW 1.5 billion on October 31, 2005, a credit transaction agreement of KRW 2.2 billion on September 15, 2006, and a credit transaction agreement of KRW 1.3 billion on November 11, 2008, respectively, to obtain additional loans from the instant savings bank.

C. Around September 2005, B entered into a sales contract between the Defendant and the Defendant to purchase E 430 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the purchase price of KRW 400,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) in Ansan-si, a part of the instant business site, and paid KRW 40,000 as the down payment, and KRW 160,000 as the intermediate payment.

B Since then, since the project site required to carry out the project in this case was not secured, the project authorization was not obtained, and the savings bank in this case failed to repay the loan principal of KRW 7,978,204,421 to the savings bank in this case.

E. On June 24, 2011, the savings bank of this case was declared bankrupt by Seoul Central District Court 201Hau72, and the Plaintiff was appointed as bankruptcy trustee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's primary claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 B is significantly high compared to the market price of the instant real estate for the purpose of multi-family housing development projects in around 2005, which is the time of purchasing the instant real estate.

arrow