logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.04.19 2018가단18782
토지매매계약금 및 중도금의 반환 등
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 70,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from September 13, 2017 to April 19, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On August 23, 2017, the Plaintiff purchased from the Defendant for the purpose of mushroom growing 3,028 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). The main content of the contract is as follows:

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). - Sales proceeds: KRW 412 million (payment on the day of the contract), KRW 50 million (payment on the day of the contract), KRW 50 million (payment on September 12, 2017), the remainder of KRW 312 million (payment on October 7, 2017) - If a seller or a purchaser fails to perform any of the terms and conditions of this contract, the other party may demand the person who has defaulted to perform the contract and rescind the contract.

In addition, a person who has failed to fulfill the contract may claim damages due to the cancellation of the contract, and the down payment shall be considered as the basis for compensation for damages unless otherwise agreed on the damages (Article 6).

1. The seller shall conduct a boundary survey, and the buyer shall use two Hashes after the boundary survey, and the seller shall remove three Hashes;

(b)

3. The lessee (D) shall complete the removal of crops with the seller by the remaining date.

The Plaintiff paid 100 million won in total to the Defendant on the date of payment agreed upon under the instant sales contract, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant delayed the remainder payment date of the instant sales contract on October 10, 2017 under mutual agreement.

On October 16, 2017, the Plaintiff declared that the instant sales contract will be rescinded, since the Defendant did not perform the terms and conditions of the instant sales contract by October 1, 2017, and did not appear at the place where the remainder payment was made.

On the other hand, around October 10, 2017, the Defendant removed the Hask 3 Hask (hereinafter “the instant vinyl”) installed on the instant land (hereinafter “the instant vinyl”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 and Eul evidence 2 through 29 (including each number, hereinafter the same).

arrow