beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the Defendants shall be revoked.
2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 20, 2014, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) on September 20, 2014, as indicated in the attached Table to F, an online high-speed trading site (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).
(2) On September 22, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) received a call from a nameless winner (hereinafter referred to as “G”) indicating the name of “the person who will purchase the instant vehicle” in order to sell the purchase price at KRW 49.9 million; and (b) received a call from the Plaintiff to the effect that “the person who will purchase the instant vehicle” was “the person who will purchase the instant vehicle.” On the same day, around 14:00 on the same day, the Plaintiff was called to the effect that “the person who will display the name shall prepare and change documents, such as a certificate of personal seal impression, on which the person who will display the name was Defendant B.”
3) On September 22, 2014, on the other hand, at around 10:00, Defendant B confirmed that Defendant B had the intent to purchase the instant vehicle, and confirmed the instant vehicle by finding the Plaintiff around September 16, 2014, together with Defendant B, around September 22, 2014. The following facts were stated to the effect that “ how the instant automobile becomes the price,” and that “E, who received the phone, becomes the KRW 45 million, becomes the KRW 45 million,” and notified the location of the instant automobile to the end.
2) The Plaintiff and Defendant B concluded a sales contract on the instant motor vehicle, and agreed not to prepare a sales contract, and the sales price was deposited to be paid in the buyer’s name in the buyer’s name to the Plaintiff by settling the account and remitting it to the Plaintiff. However, E knew that the instant motor vehicle was seized due to local taxes in arrears, etc., and the Plaintiff stated that “The amount would be cancelled upon the payment of the instant motor vehicle, and that it will be transferred to the next day.”