logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원군산지원 2016.02.16 2015가단53594
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B shall be KRW 140 million and 15% per annum from July 11, 2015 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 8, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant B to purchase the land owned by the Defendant E, F, G, and H 4 (hereinafter “instant land”) at the cost of KRW 427 million (hereinafter “instant contract”) and paid the down payment to Defendant B.

B. The content of the instant sales contract pertaining to nonperformance is as follows.

Article 6 (Non-performance of Obligations and Compensation for Damages) If a seller or buyer has any non-performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the other party shall notify in writing the person who has defaulted, and the contract may be rescinded.

In addition, the parties to the contract may claim damages from the other party due to the cancellation of contract respectively, and the contract deposit shall be considered as compensation for damages, unless otherwise agreed.

C. Defendant C is the husband of Defendant B, who was involved in the process of concluding the instant sales contract, and Defendant D is a licensed real estate agent.

At the time of the instant sales contract, the voluntary auction procedure was already in progress with respect to the instant land. The Plaintiff was not notified from any of the Defendants.

E. Ultimately, the Plaintiff participated in the auction procedure of the instant land and received a successful bid on August 11, 2015, and notified Defendant B of the cancellation of the instant sales contract by serving the instant complaint on the grounds of impossibility of performance.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, significant facts in this court, Gap evidence 1, 2-1-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of recognition as to Defendant B, the instant sales contract was lawfully rescinded upon the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent due to Defendant B’s nonperformance of obligation.

Therefore, Defendant B returned to the Plaintiff the down payment of KRW 70 million received from the Plaintiff due to restitution, and the instant case.

arrow