beta
Text
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Determination of the validity of the instant sales contract for each of the instant land between Plaintiff A and Defendant E
A. The facts of recognition 1) Plaintiff A paid 40,00,000 won for each of the instant lands between Defendant E on July 27, 2013 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and KRW 50,000 for each of the instant lands, and the down payment of KRW 10,00,000 on the date of the contract, and the remainder of KRW 40,00,000 for each of the instant lands paid on August 7, 2013 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
(2) Defendant E paid the Plaintiff KRW 10,000,000 for the remainder on July 30, 2013, and KRW 40,000 for the remainder on July 30, 2013.
3) On July 30, 2013 through the Certified Judicial Scriveners J, each of the instant lands was registered for ownership transfer in Defendant E’s name on July 30, 2013. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, evidence No. 4, evidence No. 9-1 through 3, evidence No. 16, and the purport of the entire pleadings.
B. Plaintiff A’s assertion of office capacity is an incompetent person at the time of the instant sales contract, and thus, the instant sales contract is null and void. 2) The conclusion of the instant sales contract by Plaintiff A, who is unable to make a normal judgment on the assertion of unfair legal acts, constitutes a juristic act of which fairness is considerably lost due to rashness, and thus, the instant sales contract is null and void.
3) Upon entering into the instant sales contract, Defendant E’s assertion of mistake or fraud made the instant sales contract by deceiving K, who is the grandchild of Plaintiff A, to mislead K to make an additional application document for compensation for the Plaintiff’s participation in war, and thus, revoked the instant sales contract pursuant to Article 108 of the Civil Act or Article 110 of the Civil Act. (4) Since the instant sales contract was concluded between K, who was not authorized by the Plaintiff’s assertion of unauthorized Representation, and thus, the instant sales contract is null and void.
C. Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 in the above facts of recognition, and this Court.