(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.01.18 2015가단61693

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) 서울남부지방법원 2017.01.18 2015가단61693

부당이득 반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 23, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase 172/300 of the 3,300 square meters of the 3,300 square meters of the 3,300 square meters of the 1st place of land owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant land share”) in the purchase price of KRW 30,474,080, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the 1st place of land in the Plaintiff’s name on the 26th day of the same month after the payment of the above purchase price to the Defendant.

B. On August 24, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase 66/2,645 m2,645 m2,645 m2 (hereinafter “instant land share”) out of the purchase price of KRW 11,328,800 (hereinafter “instant second sale contract”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant land share 2 in the name of the Plaintiff on August 31, 2015, after paying the said purchase price in full.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 12, 13, and 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is null and void as an unfair legal act is a Chinese national from China, and the Defendant, using the Plaintiff’s scam and experience, who did not receive proper education in the transaction situation of the Republic of Korea, sold approximately twenty-two times the estimated market price, and the shares in the 2nd land in the instant case to the price approximately fifty seven times the estimated market price. Since each of the instant sales contracts is null and void as an unfair legal act, the Defendant must return to the Plaintiff the money equivalent to the purchase price of each of the instant cases.

(2) E, F, and G, an executive officer or employee of the Defendant claiming revocation of the declaration of intent by fraud, shall purchase real estate in which the value of the pertinent land does not fall short of 1/100 of the won value by the Republic of Korea’s monetary reform, even though each of the instant land had no value of development.

In particular,

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.02.08 2015가단61495

-서울남부지방법원 2017.01.18 2016가단22534

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.05 2016나40537

-수원지방법원 2017.04.21 2016나65466

-전주지방법원 남원지원 2017.01.25 2016가단11142