logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.09.06 2018나2062950
부당이득금
Text

Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant F against the plaintiff F shall be revoked, and the part against the cancellation shall be the plaintiff B.

Reasons

1. The grounds for this court's judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance shall be as follows 2:

(a).

As stated in the foregoing paragraph, we add the following 3.3 to the 12th 46th 46th of the judgment of the first instance court. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant E corporation of the first instance court, and claims against the defendant corporation of the first instance court C corporation of the first instance court except for the part concerning claims against the defendant corporation of the first instance court and the defendant corporation of the first instance judgment as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court. Thus, they are cited in accordance with

2. Parts to be dried;

A. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the Plaintiff B’s non-performance of the obligation of Defendant F during the period from No. 11 to No. 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance

1. Plaintiff B’s assertion entered into a resale arrangement with Defendant F to arrange resale as to the instant commercial building K by the end of the period of prohibition of resale, and Defendant FF’s failure to pay the sale price of the said commercial building due to the cancellation of the sale contract, thereby resulting in damage equivalent to the penalty.

Therefore, Defendant F is liable to pay to Plaintiff B the amount equivalent to the penalty confiscated as compensation for the failure to comply with the resale arrangement.

2. Determination

A. According to the existence of resale arrangement agreement and the purport of Gap evidence No. 16 and Gap evidence No. 25, it is recognized that defendant F agreed to arrange the resale of the commercial building K of this case to plaintiff B.

B. The main text of Article 390 of the Civil Act provides, “If the obligor fails to perform the obligation in accordance with the content of the obligation, the obligee may claim damages.”

The purpose of compensation for damages in default liability is to recover the status of the obligee if the obligation was properly performed, so the obligor who violated the contract shall compensate for the same economic interest as the contract was completely performed.

arrow