beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the following additional determination as to the Defendant’s assertion added or emphasized in the trial. Thus, this is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Before the Plaintiff entered into the instant sales contract, the Defendant falsely advertised the Defendant with regard to the creation of a marine park and the opening of a light rail, and pursuant to Article 6(1) of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff violated Article 6(1) of the instant sales contract within 60 days from the completion date of the building, and the instant sales contract was not executed due to the Plaintiff’s cause attributable to the Plaintiff, such as completing the registration of transfer of ownership under the name of the trust company before the cancellation of the instant sales contract with respect to the instant apartment 104 Dong 806, which was sold by the Defendant. Since the Plaintiff, who is not the Defendant, has a ground for cancellation, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case
The following facts or circumstances, which are acknowledged by each entry and the entire purport of the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 (including spot numbers in the case of serial numbers), were the content of the instant sales contract, namely, the false and exaggerated advertising alleged by the Defendant, became the content of the instant sales contract.
There is no evidence to prove that there was an implied agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the contents of the sales contract, and there is no evidence to specify the “date of completion” under Article 6(1) of the instant sales contract, and the registration of preservation of ownership on the instant apartment on December 2, 2008, which is within the period of designation of occupancy of the instant apartment (from August 27, 2008 to December 31, 2008). The Defendant did not pay part of the intermediate payment already to be paid by the Defendant prior to the completion of the instant apartment.