(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.01.20 2015가단2849

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) 수원지방법원 2016.01.20 2015가단2849

보관금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 18, 2014, the Plaintiff, a licensed real estate agent, concluded a sales contract with the non-party D by setting the sales price of KRW 320 million with the non-party D regarding the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Apartment-gu Apartment-dong 204 Dong 202 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) as the Defendant’s brokerage, and agreed to receive the down payment of KRW 33 million on the day and the balance is paid to KRW 287 million on September 30, 2014.

B. The instant sales contract is a sales contract in the state of the right to sell the instant apartment, and the sales price was set at KRW 320 million by deducting the so-called Earp premium of KRW 29 million from the initial sale price of KRW 349 million. For that reason, the Defendant, a broker, was to keep the remainder of KRW 27 million, excluding the remainder of KRW 39 million, which is the difference between the sales contract amount paid by the Plaintiff to the selling company and KRW 34.9 million, on the date of the contract, and the said down payment was not actually paid to the Plaintiff.

C. Article 6 (Non-performance of Obligations and Compensation for Damages) of the apartment sales contract of this case states that “If a seller or a purchaser fails to fulfill the terms and conditions of this contract, the other party may demand in writing the person who has defaulted, and the other party may rescind the contract. In addition, the party to the contract may claim damages arising from the termination of contract to the other party, and the contract shall be deemed as the basis for compensation for damages, unless otherwise agreed.”

However, D did not pay the balance of the purchase price on the date of the balance, and the Plaintiff was also unable to pay the balance of the purchase price to the Seocho General Construction Co., Ltd., a selling company, and the sales contract for the instant apartment between the Plaintiff and the Seocho General Construction Co., Ltd. was eventually cancelled on November 4, 2014.

E. The Defendant, on October 12, 2014, deposited money KRW 27 million with D.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2020.11.26 2019가단206741

-수원지방법원 2008.4.1.선고 2007나9600 판결

-제주지방법원 2017.10.20 2017가단56577

-의정부지방법원 2015.02.13 2013가단56006

-서울남부지방법원 2016.08.10 2015가단46502