(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.12.21 2017나2043105

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) 서울고등법원 2017.12.21 2017나2043105

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendant is dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On December 20, 2007, the Plaintiff decided to purchase the forest land G 4,403 square meters in the wife population G (hereinafter “the forest of this case”), which is the ownership of the Defendant clan, for KRW 600 million. The Plaintiff concluded a sales contract with the representative of the Defendant clan C (the joint Defendant of the first instance trial around December 2005) regarding the forest of this case, and paid KRW 60 million as the contract deposit on the date of the contract, and KRW 540 million as the remainder on January 23, 2008, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on December 20, 207.

B. On February 22, 2012, the Defendant clan filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff’s name on the ground that the sale of the forest of this case was conducted without a resolution of a general meeting by the Suwon District Court 2012Ga12968.

Therefore, although the plaintiff filed an appeal, it was dismissed (Seoul District Court 2013Na11499), and the judgment in favor of the defendant clan became final and conclusive on June 27, 2014, and accordingly the registration of transfer of ownership of the forest of this case was cancelled.

C. On June 15, 2011, in Suwon District Court Decision 2010DaMa594, the Defendant clan’s minutes were prepared at will with respect to the disposition of the forest of this case, and the Defendant clan’s real estate owned by the Defendant was disposed of at will, including selling the forest of this case, and embezzled the proceeds thereof to the Plaintiff, and was sentenced to four and a half years to be convicted of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment (Embezzlement) of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) and the preparation of qualification and private documents, and the appeal was dismissed (Seoul High Court Decision 2011No1750), and the judgment of the first instance of the criminal case became final and conclusive as it is.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, and each number of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 shall be included, below.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2017.07.14 2016가합81389

-서울북부지방법원 2018.01.18 2016가합1964

-대법원 2000. 10. 27. 선고 2000다22881 판결

-서울고등법원 2015.09.17 2014나41539

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2013.07.11 2012고합545