beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
The Defendant and C agreed on August 25, 2014 to purchase each parcel of land listed in the separate sheet from the two co-owners, and to invalidate the sale if the building permit is not obtained on the ground.
The defendant and C completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 24, 2014 according to the above sales contract.
The Defendant and C agreed to divide the specific part of the square-type shape into sectional ownership by reflecting the remaining land, excluding the part to be used as a road site, among each land listed in the attached list.
On June 25, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 29, 2015, based on the fact that he/she purchased 1/2 co-ownership shares from the Defendant as the grounds for registration.
In relation to the transfer of ownership, the Plaintiff paid KRW 150 million to the Defendant as the purchase price.
Attached Form
Each land indicated in the list was changed into a site on April 4, 2016, and C constructed a second-story detached house on that ground and completed registration of ownership preservation on April 7, 2016.
[Grounds for recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including the number of partial heading), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the plaintiff's claim for the purport of the whole pleadings from the defendant to purchase from the defendant the total amount of 150 square meters and 30 square meters of roads and forests, and purchase the purchase price of KRW 1,50 million per square meter except for the portion of roads and forests which are not valuable.
However, by completing the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to 1/2 co-ownership shares of each land listed in the separate sheet, the Plaintiff only owned 300 square meters prior to D/ 600 square meters prior to Jeju-si (per 91 square meters).
The subject matter of the sales contract concluded by the original and the Defendant is “150 square meters prior to this,” and thus, it is insufficient for the Defendant.