beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 270,000,000 to the Plaintiff and Defendant B with respect thereto from November 12, 2015, and Defendant C.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is jointly owned by the Defendants and D in 1/3 shares, respectively.
B. On July 16, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the Defendants and D to purchase the instant real estate in the amount of KRW 2.71,95 million (Provided, That as seen earlier, in preparing a sales contract as seen earlier, the Plaintiff entered the sales contract into the so-called “the so-called “the so-called “the so-called “the sales contract”).
C. The instant sales contract: ① The sales price shall be KRW 2.57 billion, but the down payment shall be KRW 200 million on the date of the contract, and the intermediate payment shall be KRW 300 million on the date of the contract.
9. The remainder 17.17. and the remainder 2.72.5 billion won are paid respectively on October 14 of the same year. ② Article 6 of the sales contract provides that “a party to a contract may claim damages to the other party arising from the cancellation of the contract, and the compensation for damages shall be deemed to be the basis for compensation for damages, unless otherwise agreed upon.” As a special agreement, “D among the co-sellers is a joint seller overseas to enter into a contract on behalf of the Defendants, who are co-seller, and is responsible for performing the contract. The buyer accepts the substitute contract.”
The Plaintiff paid KRW 270 million to the Defendants on the day of the instant sales contract. On the same day, the Plaintiff prepared a cash storage certificate stating that the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 147 million, which is the difference between the actual sales price and the sales price entered in the sales contract (i.e., KRW 2.70 million - KRW 2.57 billion - KRW 2.572.5 million on the day of the contract, which is the difference between the actual sales price and the sales price entered in the sales contract, and deliver it to the Defendants on July 28, 2015.
E. On July 25, 2015, the Defendants notified the Plaintiff that the implementation of the instant sales contract was impossible because D did not consent to the instant sales contract, and the Plaintiff ought to have a more understanding of D with the Defendants.