beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief filed).
1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s defense that the Defendant’s rescission of the instant sales contract cannot be deemed to be a cause attributable to the Plaintiff’s delay of the payment of the remainder, and the Defendant’s failure to perform the duty of cooperation under the instant sales contract by violating the duty of cooperation under paragraph (5) of the terms and conditions of the instant sales contract, and rejected the Defendant’s defense that the Defendant may refuse to perform the duty of cooperation until the fulfillment
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the payment date of balance, the validity of the Defendant’s expression of intent to rescind a contract, and the refusal to perform the duty of cooperation, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby adversely recognizing facts beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence
2. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 3 and 4, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million ( KRW 230 million, an amount equal to the contract deposit, and KRW 100 million, an amount equal to the contract deposit paid by the Plaintiff based on the sales contract for the land related to the instant case), and damages for delay, in total, KRW 330 million,000
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court erred in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the Defendant’s liability for damages under the sales contract for the instant land, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.