(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.11.23 2018가단200192

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) 서울남부지방법원 2018.11.23 2018가단200192

약정금

Text

1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C on October 31, 1997, acquired ownership of an apartment as indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. C died on July 13, 2017, and his heir as his/her child D, the Plaintiff, and the Defendant and his/her child E have F, G, and H.

C. On November 9, 2017, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of inheritance by a consultation and division as of the instant apartment on July 13, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 2, Eul evidence No. 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On October 26, 2017, after completing the registration of the apartment of this case with the Defendant, the Plaintiff sold the apartment of this case and repaid the Defendant’s debt (the maximum amount of KRW 189,60,000) to the Defendant’s new bank loan, and the remainder to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

(2) However, the Defendant sold the instant apartment and paid 119,90,000 won (i.e., the actual transaction of the instant apartment as of December 2, 2017 - the maximum debt amount of the right to collateral security - KRW 189,60,000) equivalent to the remainder other than the loan obligations of the new bank (i.e., the purchase and sale of the instant apartment as of December 2, 2017 - the maximum debt amount of the right to collateral security - the Defendant is obligated to pay 119,90,000 won to the Plaintiff in accordance with the instant agreement. (ii) The Defendant asserted that the instant agreement was not concluded with the Plaintiff.

The deceased C attempted to bring the Defendant to the prohibition of the apartment of this case, and only the Plaintiff among the original inheritors opposed to such contents, but thereafter, an agreement has been reached on the share of inheritance with respect to the apartment of this case with the opinion of other inheritors, and the registration of ownership transfer in the future has been completed.

B. As to whether the Plaintiff entered into the instant agreement with the Defendant, the health team and the record of the instant case.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2019.10.11 2018가단20165

-부산지방법원 2019.08.13 2018가단326935

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.25 2016가합549276

-서울동부지방법원 2018.10.10 2016가합109411

-수원지방법원 2020.01.17 2019가단517783