(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.02.05 2019가단3120

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.02.05 2019가단3120

계약금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 4, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to transfer the business title of the “F” (hereinafter “the instant PC”) operated by the Defendant on the second floor of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu E-gu E-Commercial Building (hereinafter “instant building”) from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”) at KRW 347 million, and paid the Defendant the down payment amount of KRW 40 million to the Defendant.

At the time, the Defendant leased the second floor of the instant building in KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 8.5 million (the lease term between October 9, 2017 and October 9, 2019), and operated the said PC.

B. On December 12, 2018, the Plaintiff and Defendant D notified the instant building that the existence of the reconstruction drawings (Evidence No. 4, hereinafter “instant drawings”) drafted around April to May 2016 with respect to the instant building was the issue and that the instant contract was rescinded.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. After entering into the instant contract with D only reliance upon the Defendant’s oral statement, the Plaintiff’s assertion found the existence of the instant drawings and discovered the reconstruction plan of the instant building by searching for the surrounding real estate brokerage office with suspicion that the Defendant would promptly dispose of the instant PC.

The defendant did not notify the reconstruction plan, which is an important matter whether to conclude the contract of this case, and the plaintiff has not revoked the contract of this case on the ground of the above deception.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return the down payment amount of KRW 40 million to the plaintiff and pay the delay damages to the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged in the entries or videos of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 5:

1. C who, on behalf of the Plaintiff, deals with the affairs related to the instant contract, shall be transferred to the team leader G, etc. of D from one year before the instant contract was concluded.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2020.02.05 2019가단3120

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.27 2019가단5044121

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.18 2017나4200

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.01.26 2016가단72477

-서울북부지방법원 2017.05.25 2016가합24660