The Defendants jointly share KRW 60,000,000 with respect to the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from October 17, 2019 to November 24, 2020.

Facts of recognition

On May 9, 2019, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant B on June 1, 2019 to acquire all rights related to the operation of “E” (hereinafter “instant store”) located on the second floor of the Damat Doldong-gu, Daegu (hereinafter “instant store”) from Defendant B (hereinafter “instant transfer proceeds”), and paid each of the Defendant B KRW 110 million on May 10, 2019, and KRW 10 million on July 1, 2019, respectively.

On September 5, 2019, the Defendants promised to return the instant transfer proceeds to the Plaintiff by September 30, 2019 (hereinafter “instant agreement”), respectively, paid KRW 10 million on the same day to the Plaintiff, and KRW 40 million on October 1, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] In light of the above facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 4 (including additional number), Eul evidence Nos. 1, and Eul's overall purport of pleading, the judgment on the ground of claim for the return of the transfer price of this case as a whole, the defendants are jointly liable to pay to the plaintiff 60 million won (=10 million won - 50 million won) and damages for delay, unless there are special circumstances.

As to the determination of the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants asserted that the agreement of this case was cancelled by the delivery of the written reply dated August 3, 2020, stating that “the Plaintiff’s employee at the store of this case said to be the president and was in a state of suppressing the Defendants.” As such, the Defendants asserted that the agreement of this case constitutes a declaration of intention by coercion and constitutes a service of the written reply dated August 3, 2020.

In order to be a declaration of harm by coercion, the other party should have made a fear and expression of harm due to the other party’s unlawfully notifying the harm. Here, in order to make a threat of harm illegal, the threat of harm and injury in light of the transaction concept and overall circumstances at the time of coercion to be illegal.