logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.09.05 2017나269
계약금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 21, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant to lease (hereinafter “instant store”) No. 107, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, for a deposit of KRW 20 million (hereinafter “instant store”), and paid the down payment to the Defendant on the same day, and the remainder of KRW 15 million was paid on March 31, 2016, and the instant store will receive by March 31, 2016.

B. On March 29, 2016, at the G Licensed Real Estate Agent D and the Plaintiff’s spouse, and the Defendant’s mother on March 29, 2016, discussed the outstanding payment date and the delivery date of the instant store at the G Licensed Real Estate Agent Office located in the above CB Dong B101.

C. On April 11, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to deliver the instant store to the Defendant by April 15, 2016, and to cancel the instant store when the Plaintiff did not deliver it.

‘The mail sent the mail'. D.

The Plaintiff has not received the instant store from the Defendant until now.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap No. 1, 2, Eul No. 3, Eul's testimony, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff did not deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff until March 3, 2016, and thus violated the instant lease agreement. Since the Plaintiff rescinded the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the Defendant’s nonperformance, the Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 10,00,000,000,000, in compensation for damages. (2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to change the delivery date of the instant store on March 29, 2016 to April 30, 2016, the Defendant did not violate the instant lease agreement.

B. The fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to deliver the instant store to the Plaintiff by March 31, 2016 when concluding the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff as to whether the Defendant was in default, and the Defendant up to now.

arrow