(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.01.24 2016가단30882

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) 인천지방법원 2017.01.24 2016가단30882

계약금반환

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. 1) Land and buildings located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City C (hereinafter “instant real estate”)

As to the purchase price of KRW 550,000 (the date of the contract amounting to KRW 55,00,000,000, and the remainder of KRW 495,000,000 until June 23, 2016), a real estate sales contract (Evidence A2) was prepared as of April 13, 2016 (hereinafter “the first sales contract”).

(2) 2) The “name column of the buyer” in the said real estate sales contract states “the Plaintiff and one other,” and the signature of the Plaintiff is written, and the seal is affixed thereto.

B. On April 13, 2016, the date of the contract, the Plaintiff transferred the down payment of KRW 55,000,000 to the Defendant of the first sales contract.

C. On the other hand, on May 18, 2016, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with Nonparty D by setting the sales price of KRW 555,00,000 for the instant real estate (hereinafter “the second sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer for reasons of the said sales contract with D.

On May 18, 2016, the date of the second sale contract, the Defendant transferred KRW 30,000 to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5, Eul's 4, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff does not return KRW 25,00,000 out of the down payment to the plaintiff even though the first sale contract was rescinded by agreement with the defendant, so the defendant shall pay it to the plaintiff.

The defendant asserts that the buyer of the first sales contract is not the plaintiff, but the non-party E, and the first sales contract was not rescinded.

B. Regarding determination 1 buyer determination, who is the party to the contract generally constitutes a matter of interpretation of the intent of the party involved in the contract.

The interpretation of declaration of intention clearly establishes the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of indication.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2018.07.18 2017가단100892

-창원지방법원통영지원 2016.01.14 2015가합10420

-서울고등법원 2018.10.05 2018나2026220

-수원지방법원 2015.06.05 2014가합8069

-수원지방법원 2017.11.17 2016나76008