logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.09.29 2015나2048694
분양대금반환
Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

Reasons

The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment, except where the judgment on the plaintiffs' arguments is modified or added as stated in paragraph (2).

The parts of 9.10 to 12.0 shall be modified as follows:

In accordance with each of the sales contracts in this case, the buyer of each of the stores in this case is obligated to pay the unpaid balance and late payment charges out of the supplied amount when the seller designates the sale date. If the seller pays the sale price and late payment charges from the buyer and the preservation registration for each of the stores in this case is made, the seller is obligated to implement the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership. Thus, the obligation of the plaintiffs to pay the remainder of the sale price in each of the sales contracts in this case is the obligation to perform the pre-payment prior to the obligation to transfer the ownership of the defendant C. 10 pages 8.

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1 even if each of the sales contracts of this case was cancelled, the plaintiffs cannot be deemed to pay the remaining sales price to the defendant C.

Even if the defendant C had completed the registration of preservation of ownership for each of the stores of this case, 60 days from March 6, 2009

5. From June, the obligation to transfer the ownership of Defendant C reached the due date. Accordingly, since the obligation to pay the purchase price of each of the plaintiffs and the obligation to transfer the ownership of Defendant C are concurrently performed, there is no late payment charge.

2. On the other hand, the late payment charges borne by the plaintiffs constitute an estimate of damages, and in the event that a right to a site is not completed with respect to each of the stores of this case, it is impossible for buyers to exercise a full ownership, and it is the scheduled date of occupancy.

arrow