(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.10.29 2019나68558

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 2020.10.29 2019나68558

계약금 등 반환

Text

The plaintiff's primary claim added by this court is dismissed.

A. The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 3, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract to purchase the building C and D (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from the Defendant for KRW 282 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and paid the Defendant the down payment amount of KRW 30 million on the same day.

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant transferred the ownership of the instant real estate to E on February 28, 2018 according to the sales contract concluded with E, a third party, on January 19, 2018.

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

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The primary assertion is that the Defendant, despite its duty to register the ownership of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant sales contract, sold the said real estate to a third party and eventually became impossible to perform the said duty.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s rescission of the instant sales contract through the delivery of a duplicate of the statement of grounds of appeal. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 60 million including the down payment of KRW 30 million and the down payment of KRW 30 million, which is equivalent to the down payment, as compensation for breach of contract, as a result of the cancellation of contract and the restitution for delay.

B. While cancelling the agreement with the Defendant on the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff agreed to receive the down payment already paid when the instant real estate was sold to a third party. Since the instant real estate was sold to a third party and the ownership transfer registration was completed, the Defendant is liable to pay the down payment already paid to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million and delay damages therefrom.

3. Determination

A. Whether the sales contract in this case has been terminated and whether the defendant's duty to restore was terminated or the contract has been terminated or terminated, regardless of whether the contract has the right to rescission, is terminated by both parties, and the contract has not been concluded from the beginning.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원안양지원 2016.04.07 2015가단108626

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2017.11.14 2017가단3143

-서울남부지방법원 2020.10.22 2019가단22351

-의정부지방법원 2016.04.19 2015가단105797

-전주지방법원 2013.10.22 2012가단28426