logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 안동지원 2017.02.10 2016가단3584
분양대금반환
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 150 million and the period from September 1, 2016 to February 10, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 13, 2013, the Plaintiff and Defendant B entered into a contract for the sale of loan purchase rights (hereinafter “instant sale contract”) with the Plaintiff’s loan purchase price of KRW 150 million, 201 Dong-dong 101, which was newly constructed in Ansan-si, and Defendant C Co., Ltd (hereinafter “C”) and Defendant D jointly and severally guaranteed their respective responsibilities for the instant sale contract.

B. The instant sales contract is concluded on June 30, 2014 on the occupancy date, and there is an indication that the sales contract in question is “entire payment of the total amount of the sales price by transfer or takeover contract.”

C. On September 4, 2015, Defendant B newly constructed multi-household housing on the land above E, and completed registration of preservation of ownership on the housing No. 101, Dong Dong-si E 201, and on June 28, 2016, the registration of revision of building indication was completed on the housing above the site ownership as “No. 101, Dong-si E and F 101, Dong-dong 101.”

(hereinafter “instant housing”) D.

On September 17, 2015, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the land trust corporation for the reason of the trust on the same day, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant B for the reason of the attribution of trust property on the same day on June 28, 2016, and the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the land trust corporation for the same day on the same day.

E. On July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendants to transfer ownership according to the instant sales contract by notifying Defendant D of the performance of the registration procedure for transfer of ownership regarding the instant housing. However, the Defendants did not dispute the validity of the instant sales contract and did not comply with it until the closing date of the argument.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above fact of recognition as to the cause of the claim, Defendant B’s obligation to transfer ownership in the instant sales contract to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

arrow