(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.08.28 2018가단112932

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.08.28 2018가단112932

위약금 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 3, 2018, the Plaintiff introduced that the “E Music Research Institute” located in Daejeon U.S. D operated by the Defendant from C (hereinafter “E Music Research Institute”) was gathered from the instant private teaching institute, and visited the instant private teaching institute to determine whether to accept the instant private teaching institute.

B. The Defendant presented KRW 125,00,000 as the acquisition price of the instant driving school. However, the Plaintiff adjusted the acquisition price to KRW 110,00,000 in consultation with the Defendant by means of C on the ground that the acquisition price is excessive. On March 13, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a verbal contract with the Defendant on the ground that the Plaintiff and the Defendant take over all of the rights and facilities such as the original students, facilities, etc. of the instant driving school from the Defendant for KRW 110,00,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”) and paid KRW 44,00,000 on the same day the down payment.

C. On March 28, 2018, the Defendant sent a content-certified mail to the effect that the Plaintiff would give up the contract of this case if the Plaintiff did not pay any balance of KRW 66,00,000,000, which the Plaintiff agreed to pay immediately after the conclusion of the contract, and the Plaintiff would be aware of the intent to give up the contract if it did not pay any balance by March 30, 2018. The Defendant sent a written notice to the effect that “the contract of this case is rescinded on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to perform its duty to provide information on the number of financial resources.”

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 2, 6, and 7, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's transfer price is calculated is about 110,00,000 won on the premise that the transfer price is about 100,000 won and that 44,000,000 won among them is paid as a down payment, the plaintiff's claim is about 87 or 82, and the number of financial resources is not notified as accurate.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2016.09.20 2016가단305989

-인천지방법원 2018.08.24 2017노4169

-의정부지방법원 2017.11.08 2016가합52835

-울산지방법원 2018.07.11 2017나2496

-수원지방법원 2008. 09. 03. 선고 2007구합11437 판결