logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.08.03 2017나60380
사용료
Text

1. The Defendants in the judgment of the first instance, including the claim extended or reduced before the remand.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The construction of the Masan General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Masan General Construction”) decided to newly construct G apartment (former name H apartment, H apartment, hereinafter “instant apartment”) on the land outside N in Kimhae-si and 16 lots on the ground.

B. On June 3, 199, the Housing Business Mutual Aid Association (the Plaintiff comprehensively succeeded to the rights and obligations of the Plaintiff on June 3, 1999; hereinafter the “Plaintiff”) concluded a housing sale guarantee agreement with the purport that, on June 12, 1997, when the General Construction and General Construction and General Construction in 000 failed to perform the sale of housing to the buyers of the apartment of this case, the Plaintiff is responsible for the refund of the down payment and intermediate payment paid by the buyers or the performance of the sale of housing.

Around that time, the Plaintiff entered into a trust agreement with the Plaintiff, which stipulates that the site of the instant apartment owned by the White General Construction for the purpose of the performance of the guarantee of sale in lots, and the housing and ancillary and welfare facilities under construction, shall be entrusted to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”).

C. Around June 1998, the construction of the instant apartment was suspended due to the default of payment on the part of June, 1998, and the construction of the instant apartment was changed to the Bag Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Bagsan Construction Co., Ltd.”) and the construction right for the instant apartment was transferred.

At that time, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the succession to the construction of the apartment of this case with a long-term construction and the construction of the apartment of this case, and became a project undertaker, and had the remainder construction and the sale of the apartment of this case executed

The Plaintiff’s guarantee for the sale of housing was succeeded to the White Construction, and the status of the truster under the instant trust agreement was transferred to the White Construction.

The apartment site of this case, N, and 16 lots, which are the apartment site of this case, are ① F. 242m2m2, ② G. 7534m2, ③ J. 587m2, and ④.

arrow