logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.04.12 2018가단542119
매매대금반환
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 39,390,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from August 14, 2018 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 10, 2018, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to request the Defendant to purchase 3.9 golf membership rights (hereinafter “C golf membership rights”) of “C golf membership rights” and transfer thereof. The Plaintiff concluded a contract with the effect that the purchase price for the instant membership rights is KRW 38,50,000,000, including the transfer cost of KRW 590,000 and brokerage fee of KRW 300,000,000, in total, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the transfer cost of KRW 390,390,000. Of them, the contract amount of KRW 2,00,000, including the date of the contract, KRW 590,000, and brokerage fee of KRW 37,390,000,000, including the transfer cost, and KRW 300,000,000,000, respectively, to pay on July 12, 2018 (hereinafter “instant membership rights”).

B. Pursuant to the instant contract, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the remainder of KRW 37,390,000 on July 10, 2018, which is the date of the conclusion of the instant contract, and KRW 37,390,000, respectively.

C. However, the Defendant purchased the instant membership pursuant to the instant contract and did not implement the transfer procedure in the future of the Plaintiff on the date of closing the argument.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that "the defendant purchased the membership of this case and acquired the amount equivalent to the purchase price by deceiving the plaintiff as if he actually had such intent or ability despite the intention or ability to implement the transfer procedure in the future of the plaintiff."

However, it is difficult to see that the statement of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 alone was the fact that the defendant entered into the contract of this case with the intent of deception as asserted by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

B. 1. However, the Plaintiff is unable to delay or perform the Defendant’s contractual obligations under the instant contract.

arrow