beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under the following amount shall be revoked:
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment citing this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal as follows. Therefore, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the
[Attachment] The part related to the failure of the defendant in relation to the division of land and the part related to the failure of the defendant in relation to the division of land and the part related to the lawsuit is as follows.
A person shall be appointed.
B. At the time of the instant contract, the Plaintiff agreed to purchase 850 square meters of the instant part of the land before subdivision from the Defendant at the time of the instant contract, and the fact that the land before subdivision was divided as indicated in the annexed drawing Nos. 2 is as seen earlier. 2) Whether the subject matter of sale has been modified by the instant contract under the contract No. 2) and the Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion (i) concluded the instant contract with the Plaintiff, and the Defendant, by concluding the instant contract No. 2, to conclude each of the instant land (Provided, That in the case of land E
(B) According to the above evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts are recognized.
① According to the terms and conditions of the first contract, “The purchaser may increase or decrease the purchaser’s land at the time of division, and the balance calculated by the division drawing shall be calculated and settled.”
② In the instant contract, the subject matter was specified as “D Forest land 757 square meters” and “E forest 127 square meters”. The former is accurately identical to D land and its lot number and land category divided from the land before subdivision, as well as the area. The latter is also consistent with E land and land category after subdivision.
C. However, the above facts alone are difficult to recognize that the subject matter of sale was changed to each land of this case under the instant contract No. 2.
The reasons are as follows.
(1) The evidence mentioned above and the witness at K of the first instance trial.