logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.11.20 2019가단206968
매매대금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a person who has received fees in the event that the sales contract is concluded by supporting the sales business while serving as a sales agent in the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Cdong Group as an employee.

B. On September 25, 2017, the Defendant entered into a sales contract (total sale price of KRW 1,390,371,200) with D on the F Commercial Building G located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and paid the down payment of KRW 139,037,120.

On September 25, 2017, the Defendant transferred the above sales right to the Plaintiff KRW 139,037,120.

(B) The Plaintiff and the Defendant paid KRW 133,432,940 (the amount remaining after the Defendant deducted the value-added tax of KRW 5,604,180, which was paid directly by the executor from the contract amount) according to the instant contract.

C. On October 26, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement with H with respect to the payment of intermediate payment of the instant commercial building, and became liable for the loans specified in the separate sheet.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 20, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff purchased neighboring I commercial buildings prior to the instant contract, and became aware of the Defendant who performed the sales agency business in the process.

When recommending the Plaintiff to conclude the instant contract, the Defendant promised to resell the instant commercial building by not later than May 2019, which is the remainder payment date of the I commercial building. In fact, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to resell the instant commercial building.

Ultimately, the contract of this case is revoked because it is an expression of intent by fraud of the defendant or an expression of intent caused by mistake caused by the defendant's falsehood.

The defendant shall return 133,432,940 won paid to the plaintiff as the proceeds of sale of the right of sale to restore the original state, and the procedure to change the debtor's name of the obligation of the loan stated in the attached Form

arrow