logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.08.17 2015나7746
분양대금반환 등
Text

1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 28, 2005, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with respect to the 101 Dong-dong 106 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the following content as to the Busan Seo-gu C apartment (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

A seller under the contract: D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "D"), the down payment of KRW 1,700,000 on January 28, 2005, the intermediate payment of KRW 23,400,000 on February 7, 2005, the intermediate payment of KRW 23,400,000 on February 7, 2005, the intermediate payment of KRW 11,70,000 on February 21, 2005, the intermediate payment of KRW 3 times on April 11, 2005, the intermediate payment of KRW 70,000 on April 11, 2005, the remainder of KRW 58,50,000 on May 31, 2005: the scheduled date of occupancy: May 31, 2005.

On February 2005, the Plaintiff received a loan from a national bank and paid an intermediate payment of KRW 46,800,000 (=23,400,000 KRW 11,700,000). The Plaintiff paid KRW 27,356,053 interest on bank loans and KRW 2,405,70 on housing guarantee fees.

C. On March 25, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant sales contract was cancelled, and filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of the sale price and damages against D (Dasan District Court 2013Da24517) and rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff by filing a lawsuit seeking the payment of damages (Dasan District Court 2013Da24517). The said judgment was finalized on January 29, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, 5, 8, 9 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Since the selective claim for the refund of the sale price following the cancellation of the instant sales contract was merely a nominal lender, D, the nominal borrower, is liable to perform the obligation under the instant sales contract.

However, since the Plaintiff cancelled the instant sales contract on the ground of the Defendant’s nonperformance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 58,50,000,000,000 for the down payment and the intermediate payment already paid, as restitution, and the Plaintiff’s loan interest of KRW 27,356,053 as damages for delay and damages for delay, and KRW 29,761,753 as well as the house guarantee fee of KRW 29,705,70.

arrow