(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.09.08 2016가합46

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.09.08 2016가합46

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff, along with her husband D, represented the Defendant B by Nonparty G, who is the wife of Defendant B from Defendant B.

In the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E- 170.6 square meters and the five-story detached housing (hereinafter the “instant detached housing”) purchased each of the 1/2 shares of the total purchase price of KRW 1.41 billion (the KRW 100 million in the contract amount is KRW 150 million in the intermediate payment of KRW 150 million on August 4, 2015 when concluding the contract, and the remainder of KRW 1.160 million in the payment on September 15, 2015 and KRW 820 million in the remainder shall be paid on September 15, 2015, and the lease deposit shall be substituted by the acquisition of the lease deposit).

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). Defendant C and Nonparty F arranged an individual certified broker, and F arranged each of the instant sales contract at Defendant B, the seller, and Defendant C at the Plaintiff’s side, the buyer.

B. The Plaintiff and D paid to the Defendant the remainder, other than deposit for lease, out of the down payment, intermediate payment, and remainder, on the said date, and received the registration of ownership transfer on September 15, 2015.

C. However, around October 13, 2015, the Plaintiff and D notified the head of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government head of the instant housing of the 4th floor and the 5th floor area extension of the 5th floor of the instant housing to correct the said by November 5, 2015. On May 12, 2016, the Plaintiff and D paid KRW 1,483,200,1,730,000 for enforcement fines, respectively. Meanwhile, on September 14, 2015, the Defendant was notified of “the first corrective order” for the said reasons.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 15 (which include each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Defendant B was aware that the instant building was illegally extended at the time of the instant sales contract.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.22 2016나4548

-전주지방법원 2018.01.17 2017나3171

-전주지방법원 2017.02.08 2015가단28199

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.08 2017가합531272

-대구지방법원 2020.09.24 2020가합200409