beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 90,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from March 16, 2015 to May 11, 2015.
Reasons
1. Indication of claim;
A. The party-related Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase land of approximately 70 square meters in the part inside the ship connected with each of the above points (hereinafter “instant real estate”), among the land of Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seoju, Seo-gu, 1089 square meters, C, 349 square meters, D, D, 942 square meters, and E, 1724 square meters in the attached drawings, (2), (3, (4), (5), (6, (7), (8), (9), and (5) of the real estate indicated in the attached list, and the Defendant owned a share equivalent to five-seven percent in the part of the real estate indicated in the attached list, among those who agreed to sell the instant real estate.
B. On April 19, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a real estate sales contract and the Plaintiff’s fulfillment of the Plaintiff’s obligations into a sales contract with the Defendant and the instant real estate with a contract deposit of KRW 70,000,000 (the real estate sales contract includes the down payment of KRW 40,000,000, and the intermediate payment of KRW 30,000,000, which is in fact divided only the marks. In fact, the contract amount of KRW 70,000,000, which is the total sales price of KRW 700,000, the remainder amount of KRW 630,000,000, which is the total sales price). In addition, on June 30, 2014, the Defendant purchased all the instant real estate owned by a third party under the name of the Defendant and concluded a special agreement to develop and sell the housing site to the Plaintiff after dividing it in the attached Form.
On April 19, 2014, the Plaintiff paid 40,000,000 won, which is a part of the down payment, to the Defendant pursuant to the contract, and additionally paid 30,000,000 won on June 13, 2014.
C. The Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation, according to a special agreement at the time of the instant real estate sales contract, should complete the purchase of all of the instant real estate owned by another person under the name of the Defendant until June 30, 2014, but failed to implement the purchase. Notwithstanding the Plaintiff’s peremptory notice, the Defendant failed to perform the purchase for about seven months thereafter.
As a result of the defendant's delay of performance, such as the repayment of down payment following the rescission of the contract, the plaintiff call to the defendant at the beginning of August 2014.