beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 57,00,000 as well as 20% per annum from April 3, 2014 to September 30, 2015, and the following.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff purchased the land located in the Jeju city at the recommendation of Defendant B and provided part of the purchased land to the development project B, and Defendant B was a person who actually led the Faow Development Project, G project, etc. promoted in the Jeju E Group.
B. On December 26, 2005, the Plaintiff sold to H 1977/5931 shares of KRW 5,931 square meters of 197/5931 square meters of 197/5931 square meters of 197/5931 square meters of 200,000, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 17, 2006.
C. On January 20, 2006, the Plaintiff decided to purchase the J land in Jeju-do, Jeju-do (hereinafter “J land”) with Defendant B’s investment recommendation, and the Plaintiff was on January 20, 2006 to Defendant B.
The amount of KRW 57 million (hereinafter “the instant money”) out of the purchase price of I forest land as stated in the port was paid as land purchase consignment. D.
However, the Plaintiff, who did not purchase J land on July 2006, demanded the Defendant B to return the instant money that was paid as the consignment price for the purchase of land at the withdrawal of the J’s request for purchase of land.
E. On March 11, 2009, Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) completed the registration of the right to claim the transfer of shares on the ground of the pre-sale agreement as of March 11, 2009, No. 15760 on March 11, 2009, as the Jeju District Court No. 15760 on the portion of 100/1101 out of the 72,793 square meters of forest land in Jeju-si, which was held in title trust in the future.
(hereinafter referred to as “the provisional registration of this case”). [The grounds for recognition] did not dispute, Gap’s entries in Gap’s 1 through 3, 5, 8, 10, 12 through 16, 29 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul’s evidence 22, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Claim for return of purchase price of land.
A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the Plaintiff concluded a delegation contract with Defendant B to entrust the business of purchasing J land to Defendant B, but did not purchase the land even after a considerable period of time has elapsed, and thus, the Plaintiff terminated the above contract on July 2006. Thus, special circumstances exist.