beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff paid KRW 200 million to the defendant as a security deposit for parcelling-out on November 9, 2005, and completed the sales agency for CSang. Since the defendant paid KRW 180 million out of the above security deposit to the plaintiff and refused to return the remaining amount, the plaintiff is entitled to recover the remaining amount of KRW 20 million.
B. It was revealed that there were a considerable number of defects in the sales contract concluded by the plaintiff of the defendant's assertion that the plaintiff was acting for the sale business, and the damages caused by the plaintiff of C, an executor, exceed 20 million won of the balance of the above sales agency deposit.
Therefore, the above deposit received in order to secure damages in the course of the sale agency belongs to the defendant as a matter of course, so it is impossible to respond to the plaintiff'
2. The fact that 200 million won paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant for determination of the Plaintiff’s claim is a security deposit to secure damages on the part of the Plaintiff, which is the executor in the process of implementing the contract for sale by proxy, and the fact that the Defendant returned KRW 180 million to the Plaintiff is no dispute between the parties.
On the other hand, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1, 5 through 7 and 17, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with 8 contractors, including D, by inducing them to “unfly pay the down payment through resale unless a premium is attached.” The Plaintiff entered into the contract with 8 buyers, and the said 8 buyers to return the down payment under the Seoul Southern Southern District Court Decision 2010Na16626, 1882 (combined) against C, which filed a lawsuit against 186,976,00 won in total on July 8, 201, and the said decision became final and conclusive because both parties did not raise any objection thereto.