Confiscation Terms and Conditions and Cancellation

Where a buyer fails to pay an intermediate payment by the date on which the contract is concluded, if the buyer fails to perform the obligation to pay the intermediate payment under the forfeited terms and conditions, the contract shall be automatically rescinded at that date.

Article 544 of the Civil Act

December 14, 1971, 71Da2014 decided Feb. 12, 1980, 79Da2035 decided Feb. 12, 1980

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and one other

Daegu District Court (79Gahap375)

The appeal is dismissed.

All costs of a lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The original judgment shall be revoked.

In relation to the Plaintiff, Defendant 1, 2, 65 square meters (number 1 omitted), 65 square meters (number 2 omitted), and 94 square meters (number 2 omitted), and Defendant 2, as to (number 3 omitted), 21 square meters (number 3 omitted), 21 square meters (number 4 omitted), 67 square meters (number 4 omitted), and 67 square meters (number 4 omitted), each due to sale on January 22, 1978.

All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants in the first and second instances.

On January 22, 1978, the Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate stated in the purport of the claim from the Defendants from the Defendants and paid KRW 2,400,000 in a down payment on the same day, and paid KRW 10,000 in an intermediate payment of KRW 12,30,000 in an intermediate payment of KRW 12,30,000 in an intermediate payment of KRW 12,300 in December 12 of the same year, respectively, was agreed to pay the remainder to March 13 of the same year, and the fact that the said intermediate payment and the remainder payment were deposited on July 24 and July 25 of the same year does not conflict between the parties.

On February 16, 1978, prior to the payment date of the above part of the intermediate payment, the Defendants asserted that the above contract was automatically rescinded at the time of the above contract, because they made a special agreement that the above contract was automatically rescinded by either of the parties to the contract, and thus, the above contract was automatically rescinded at the time of payment date of intermediate payment and remaining payment. Thus, the Defendants asserted that the above contract was partially rescinded by the Non-party to the judgment of the court below as part of the testimony of the non-party to the judgment of the court below, which were stated in the evidence No. 1, No. 4 (written confirmation, and Protocol of Examination of Witnesses), No. 9, No. 11, No. 11 of the above transaction (written evidence No. 1, No. 1978). However, according to the above evidence No. 1 (written evidence No. 1) without dispute, one of the parties violated the above special agreement at the time of the above contract.

Thus, in the above sales contract to which the above special agreement (the forfeited clause) is attached, the plaintiff was automatically released on February 18, 1978 due to the plaintiff's failure to perform the obligation to pay the intermediate payment of the contract.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim based on the premise that the above sales contract remains effective is unfair and without examining it, and it is dismissed. Since the original judgment is recognized as just and reasonable, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 96 and 89 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of total costs of lawsuit.

Judges fixed ticket (Presiding Judge) Mobile Engines