Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and one other

October 15, 2019

Suwon District Court Decision 2017Kadan114717 decided May 24, 2018

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Purport of claim

The defendants jointly and severally pay to the plaintiff 70 million won with 15% interest per annum from the day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 22, 2015, the sales contract was formulated as of May 22, 2015 with Defendant 2 as the purchaser, but on May 25, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer under Defendant 1 was completed as of July 30, 2015 by the Yangyang Branch Branch of the Suwon District Court (No. 130278), which was received on July 30, 2015, and the building on the ground was destroyed or lost on October 12, 2015.

B. On August 22, 2015, the Plaintiff and Defendant 1 drafted an exclusive sale agreement with Defendant 1 to sell a total of eight households of the 8 generation units of the Dopo-si (hereinafter “instant Dopo-si”) newly built on the ground ( Address omitted) (hereinafter “instant Dopo-si”). The main contents are as follows.

In the name of business 1. General Matters in Article 1.1.1.1. : 4. Newly constructed loan 4: (8) sale area: 1,000 won in total: 3. 4. From the completion date to the three months: 8,000 won in case of the sale contract: 8,000 won in case of the sale contract, the down payment and the down payment for return of the down payment under Article 4.4 shall be paid to Defendant 1, and at the time of the contract completion, Defendant 1 shall refund the down payment to the Plaintiff at the time of the contract completion. Article 5. 8,000 won and the down payment shall be paid to the Plaintiff at the expiration of the sale period. The profit shall be divided into 7:3 (owner) and 1:00,000 won in case the sale price per household increases more than the additional sale price. In addition to the general matters of the above contract, if special agreement is stipulated and special agreement is stipulated, all of the matters of special agreement shall be applied in preference to the sale period (2).

1) Article 6

Note 2) The Parcelling-Out Price (Separate Document)

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 2 through 5, 9, Eul's 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff completed the sale of six households among the total eight households under the instant continuous contract prior to the sale, and in the case of the remaining unsold two units, the Defendants agreed with the Defendants that the Defendants would receive the total of KRW 60 million for six households already completed in lieu of transferring the sales business to a new seller and giving up the exclusive right to sell, instead of transferring the sales business to the new seller. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff a total of KRW 10,000,000 in total and KRW 60,000 in sales agency fees.

B. Determination

The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence mentioned above, i.e., Articles 1 through 5 provide that the term “this case’s exclusive dealing with the affairs related to the sale of eight households of this case,” and Article 6 provides that “the terms and conditions that the Plaintiff shall take over the unsold goods after the completion of the period for the sale of this case’s exclusive dealing with the affairs related to the sale of this case’s loan.” Therefore, the above special agreement provides that “the terms and conditions are “the conditions that the Plaintiff shall take over the unsold goods after the completion of the period for the sale of this case’s exclusive dealing with the sale of this case’s exclusive deal with the affairs related to the sale of this case’s eight households of this case’s loan,” and the Plaintiff completed the sale of this case’s exclusive deal with six households among the eight households of this case’s loan, etc. (3 households of this case’s exclusive dealing with the sale of this case’s sale of this case’s loan’s 2000,000 won, without the Plaintiff’s consent to the sale of this case’s 200.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed due to the lack of reason, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judges Span-young (Presiding Judge) Kim Jong-Jil

Note 1) The exclusive contract for sale prior to sale (No. 5-1 and No. 5-1) is written as “Article 5,” but seems to be written in writing.

Note 2) As set out in the Annex.