logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2015.06.04 2014가합1623
정산금지급
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 350,000,000 with respect thereto to the Plaintiff and the period from October 15, 2014 to June 4, 2015.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 20, 2012, the Plaintiff agreed to sell 75 units unsold in lots among D apartment units (hereinafter “instant apartment units”) under the name of E Co., Ltd. (Representative Director B, Defendant C) and distribute profits accrued from the sale of them. If the Plaintiff contributed KRW 350,000,000 to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff provided a down payment of KRW 250,000,000 and paid the down payment for the instant apartment sales contract, and F received a loan as security and paid the remainder of the sales price.

(hereinafter “instant joint project agreement”). B.

E concluded and rescinded a sales contract between E and Yongsan Co., Ltd. on April 27, 2012, sold the instant apartment at KRW 11,986,836,000 for the purchase price (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and KRW 600,000,00 for the contract deposit, and the remainder amount of KRW 11,386,836,00 for the contract date and the remainder of KRW 11,386,836,00 for the purchase price was paid on May 26, 2012.

Defendant B paid KRW 90,00,000 on the day of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and KRW 350,000,000 received from the Plaintiff, and KRW 160,000,000 received from Defendant C, and KRW 600,000,000 in total, as down payment.

Since F was unable to obtain a loan thereafter, E did not pay any balance until June 29, 2012, which is the extended payment date.

Accordingly, on June 29, 2012, E and Y agreed to cancel the instant sales contract and succeed to KRW 600,000 as the down payment of the instant apartment as the down payment of the new sales contract for the instant apartment.

C. On June 29, 2012, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendants on the refund of KRW 350,000,000,000, which was the date on which the instant sales contract was rescinded, and the Defendants offered that only the principal should be returned, while the Plaintiff demanded that the interest be returned, the agreement was reached.

The new business of the defendants and the defendants excluded from the plaintiff are currently plaintiffs.

arrow