beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 100,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 16, 2016 to April 17, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. (1) On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract: (a) on June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased KRW 680,000,00 for KRW 40,000 for intermediate payment, KRW 50,000 for KRW 50,000 on the date of the contract, and the intermediate payment, KRW 200,000,000 for KRW 150,000 on June 17, 2015, and KRW 150,000 for the remainder of KRW 150,00,000 on the said land (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”); and (b) on July 30, 2015, the remainder of KRW 40,00 on the instant building; and (c) the said detached house shall be paid to each of the instant real property (hereinafter referred to as “the instant real property”).
(2) The Plaintiff paid to B the sum of KRW 240,000,000 in down payment and intermediate payment as stipulated in the instant sales contract.
(3) Meanwhile, D was a broker who arranged the instant sales contract as a licensed real estate agent, and was paid KRW 3,400,000 by the Plaintiff on July 30, 2015.
B. The current status of the instant land was used as a road with the size of 112.4 square meters on the registry, and 6.1 square meters on the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and 5.1 square meters on the neighboring Seoul Jongno-gu E-Ground was used as a site for the neighboring building.
C. (1) The progress of the relevant civil litigation (1) against B and D, Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015Gahap572248, and with respect to B, on the ground that B’s failure to notify the Plaintiff of the fact that part of the instant land was used as a road or as a site for a neighboring building at the time of entering into the instant sales contract constitutes deception by omission, the instant sales contract was revoked, and at the same time, sought a return of KRW 240,000 in total the already paid down payment and the intermediate payment, and as to D, the damages equivalent to KRW 240,00,000 paid to B on the ground that D knew of the above fact in mediating the instant sales contract, but did not explain it to the Plaintiff.