logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원거창지원 2020.08.11 2019가단192
매매대금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Plaintiff’s assertion

On May 25, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with C, an agent of the Defendant, setting the sales amount of KRW 320,000,00 with respect to the land and building in Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter “instant real estate”). Since the Defendant agreed to acquire KRW 208,00,000, which is the secured debt of the right to collateral security established on the instant real estate, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 112,00,000 (=320,000,000 - 208,000,000,000) excluding the secured debt of the right to collateral security established on the instant real estate.

Even if the defendant did not have the authority to represent the defendant at the time of the conclusion of the above sales contract, the defendant ratified C's act of unauthorized representation by completing the registration of ownership transfer for the real estate of this case and paying the acquisition tax and property tax for the real estate of this case. Thus, the above sales contract

Judgment

According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the sales contract of this case, stating that the seller, the buyer, the real estate of this case subject to sale, the sales price of 320,000,000 won, and the special terms and conditions that the purchaser would have known of the three collateral mortgages on the register of the names of the parties (hereinafter referred to as "the sales contract of this case"), has been prepared. The sales contract of this case under the sales contract of this case is "the sales contract of this case"

However, according to the Plaintiff’s assertion that C was delegated with the authority to conclude the instant sales contract from the Defendant, it is difficult to believe the Plaintiff’s testimony and the witness’s testimony, and according to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 5, it is acknowledged that C and the Plaintiff are in fact owned by C, and thus, they are entitled to receive the sales price pursuant to the instant sales contract as accounts in the name of C. Accordingly, according to the said confirmation document, the ownership of the instant real estate shall be lost and the sales price shall be paid from the Defendant.

arrow