(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2019.10.17 2018가단63300

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) 대구지방법원서부지원 2019.10.17 2018가단63300

매매대금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the owner of the Daegu-gun Factory D (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On July 20, 2018, the Defendant concluded a contract with the Plaintiff to sell the instant real estate at KRW 333,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The key contents are as follows.

Article 2 In the sale of the instant real property, the buyer pays the purchase price as follows:

b.The down payment of KRW 30,000,000 shall be paid at the time of the contract and the intermediate payment of KRW 50,000,000 on September 17, 2018 shall be paid in the presence of the broker on October 5, 2018. The seller shall pay the remainder of KRW 253,00,000 in the presence of the broker. The seller shall pay in the presence of the broker any obligation, taxes and public charges relating to the said real estate as of the remainder payment date.

(bb) A seller under Article 5 shall pay to the buyer the documents required for the transfer of ownership at the time of receipt of the balance;

b.Article 7: The seller shall reimburse the amount of the down payment at the time of the termination of the contract; and the buyer may not claim the return of the down payment at the time of the termination of the contract.

On July 20, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 30,000,000,000. However, on August 24, 2018, the Plaintiff issued a certificate to the effect that, on September 17, 2018, when a provisional attachment registration (hereinafter referred to as “provisional attachment”) was completed for the claim amounting to KRW 100,000,000 for the instant real estate in the E’s name, the Plaintiff did not pay the intermediate payment of KRW 50,00,000 to the Defendant on the ground that the execution of the instant provisional attachment was not revoked.”

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant failed to rescind the instant provisional attachment execution by September 17, 2018, which was the date of the payment of intermediate payment, and that the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that the instant sales contract would be rescinded on such grounds on September 17, 2018.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2018.08.23 2017가단118011

-제주지방법원 2016.12.15 2016나219

-춘천지방법원 2015.07.08 2014가합918

-수원지방법원안산지원 2016.10.04 2014가단116752

-창원지방법원통영지원 2015.04.21 2013가단13626