logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.11.23 2016가단17167
계약금 반환 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. On September 22, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) concluded a sales contract with the Defendant on October 23, 2015 on the purchase price for the land of KRW 210 million with respect to the land of KRW 6,000,000,000,000, and the outstanding payment date; and (b) paid KRW 21,00,000,000 to the Defendant on September 23, 2015, which is the following day; (c) the Defendant unilaterally cancelled the sales contract without any consultation with the Plaintiff; and (d) the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 42,00,000,000,000, which is an amount equal to the down payment, to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the sales contract of this case was substantially led is not the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff entered into a special agreement to change the buyer at the time of the payment of the remainder. The Plaintiff did not pay the remainder until the payment of the remainder under the sales contract of this case. After that, the Defendant changed the buyer upon I’s request from the Defendant on November 5, 2015, and returned all the down payment of KRW 21 million paid by the Plaintiff to I. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is without merit.

2. The key issue of the instant case is whether the Defendant changed the purchaser of the instant sales contract at the request of non-party I under the instant sales contract, and whether I could oppose the Plaintiff with the return of the down payment of KRW 21 million paid by the Plaintiff, i.e., whether I can be deemed the actual party to the instant sales contract or the legitimate representative of the Plaintiff, and thus, we examine this issue.

3. In light of the following circumstances that are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 (including each number), and witness I’s testimony as a whole, I is deemed to be the actual party to the instant sales contract or at least the plaintiff’s lawful representative.

arrow