Cases of incomplete hearing on the defense of simultaneous performance

Cases of incomplete deliberation on the simultaneous performance defense.

Article 536 of the Civil Act

Countries

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 66Na1483 delivered on March 8, 1967

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Of the Defendant’s grounds of appeal, the Plaintiff revoked the administrative disposition that was sold to the Defendant, which was the property devolving upon the Plaintiff, on the ground that there was a defect in the sale in the second part of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to the Plaintiff, but it is clear that the argument that the sale to the Defendant was not a sale in the second part of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to the State is nothing more than

However, the defendant asserts that the purchase price of the building site is already paid in full to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff's claim for the principal lawsuit is unreasonable (see, e.g., the defendant's legal brief submitted by his legal representative on October 2, 1965). Although it is obvious that the above argument was the purport of the defendant's defense of simultaneous performance by asserting that the defendant's obligation to cancel the ownership of the building site and the plaintiff's obligation to refund the price are related to the plaintiff's obligation to refund the purchase price, the court below failed to deliberate and decide on this point, and there is an error of law by disregarding the defendant's defense that has an influence on the decision of the court below, and there is a reason for the appeal

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Na-dong and Do-dong Do-won Round