(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.10.22 2019가단10145

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) 부산지방법원 2020.10.22 2019가단10145

부동산매매취소및대금반환

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff: (a) believed the horse E, which would be expected to be a commercial district and thus, would be able to obtain profits by constructing or selling housing, etc.; (b) concluded a sales contract on the instant real estate with the Defendant; (c) paid the Defendant KRW 111,60,000 to the Defendant with the purchase price; and (d) completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff regarding the instant real estate.

B. However, in fact, since it is difficult to obtain permission for development activities as well as the slope was blind, construction was impossible. Accordingly, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to cancel the above sales contract by delivering the copy of the complaint of this case to the Defendant on the ground of E’s deception.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to accept from the Plaintiff the procedure for registration of cancellation on October 28, 2019, which was the date of service of a copy of the complaint of this case on the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff on the instant real estate, and to refund the purchase price already paid to the Plaintiff KRW 111,60,000, and delay damages therefor.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence Nos. 1-1 through 5, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant real estate from the Defendant for KRW 111,60,000 on March 9, 201, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as of April 26, 201 with the Changwon District Court No. 8465, which received on April 26, 2011, and the fact that the instant real estate was not expected to be developed in relation to the development plan for the F& development project adjacent to the instant real estate is recognized.

B. However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone existed the deception of E, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion.

It is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract for the instant real estate by deceiving the Defendant or E.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2013. 07. 11. 선고 2013나40237 판결

-제주지방법원 2017.11.10 2017가단796

-창원지방법원진주지원 2015.12.23 2015가합10571

-창원지방법원진주지원 2017.05.12 2016가단32809

-광주지방법원 2019.05.31 2017가단14869