logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원평택지원 2017.11.21 2016가단10402
계약금반환
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 26, 2015, with the Defendants, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendants for the purchase price of KRW 79,000,000, the remainder payment of KRW 76,900,000, the intermediate payment of KRW 300,000, the intermediate payment of KRW 31,600,000, the remainder payment of KRW 39,500,000, and the sales contract with the Defendants for the purchase price of KRW 152,00,000, the down payment of KRW 152,00,000, the down payment of KRW 15,200, the down payment of KRW 15,200,000, the intermediate payment of KRW 60,800,000, the remainder payment of KRW 76,000,000, each of the remainder payment of KRW 30,000,000 respectively (hereinafter “each of the instant sales contract”).

In addition, when the Plaintiff did not pay the remainder within three months from the agreed date, each of the instant sales contracts may be cancelled after the Defendants’ peremptory notice. In this case, 10% of the total sales price belongs to the Defendants as penalty.

B. The Plaintiff borrowed intermediate payments from the Industrial Credit Union established by the guarantee of the Defendants in each of the instant sales contracts, and paid them to the Defendants.

C. The Plaintiff did not pay any balance under the instant sales contract to the Defendants within three months from the payment date of the remainder. The Defendants notified the Plaintiff to pay the remainder, but the Plaintiff did not pay any remainder, each of the instant sales contracts was cancelled on October 26, 2016.

[Ground of certification] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 4 to 6 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s employees, who are in charge of sales agency business of each of the instant sales contracts, promised to offer loans to the Plaintiff by allowing the Plaintiff to obtain 70% loans from the first financial right when paying the remainder to the Plaintiff, who is a general recipient of livelihood benefits. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendants each of the instant contracts.

arrow