(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.08.02 2017가단18777

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) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.08.02 2017가단18777

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. On December 4, 2001, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Defendant (the Plaintiff’s small mother to Dong E) on the ground that the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of father D on the same day on November 6, 2006 with respect to the C-owned housing in Yangju-si.

B. On June 19, 2017, the Defendant sold the said housing and its site (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to F and G for KRW 310 million (hereinafter “instant purchase price”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 20, 2017.

C. On June 19, 2017, the Plaintiff, a senior grandchild, resided in the instant house before the sale of the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's argument as to the plaintiff's assertion is that the above house was taken over from the time of shipbuilding and owned by D. The defendant purchased the real estate of this case including the above house in KRW 50 million and sold it in KRW 310 million, and it is known that the plaintiff was born by the plaintiff and resided in the above house before the sale and purchase of the real estate of this case, and his family had contributed to a certain degree. The defendant promised to pay to the plaintiff KRW 150 million out of the purchase price of this case in KRW 310 million, so the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining KRW 50 million after deducting the 100 million repaid by the defendant.

First, with respect to whether the Defendant promised to give the Plaintiff KRW 150 million out of the purchase price of this case KRW 300 million, it is not sufficient to recognize the fact by only the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 6 and 7, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2018.03.22 2017가단35570

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.21 2016나10437

-서울북부지방법원 2017.06.15 2016가단43053

-서울서부지방법원 2018.09.13 2017가단230607

-서울남부지방법원 2015.02.13 2014가합6269