beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff transferred KRW 44 million to Nonparty C (the name before the opening of the name) on May 24, 2008, KRW 28 million on May 25, 2008, and KRW 16.5 million on June 16, 2008.
B. On June 17, 2008, C purchased F forest land of KRW 1977 square meters (hereinafter “fireized land”) at KRW 320 million. On the same day, C purchased the right to supply the housing site located in the G G district (hereinafter “useal housing site supply right”) at KRW 10 million. Of the above purchase price, KRW 88 million was transferred from the Plaintiff, and the remainder is C and the Defendant’s money.
C. When the Plaintiff demanded the return of the amount paid to C, C paid KRW 45 million to the Plaintiff on February 23, 2009.
C cancelled the sales contract for the fossil land, and collected KRW 120 million out of the sales price on March 2, 2009, and the Defendant recovered and paid KRW 150,300,000 out of the total amount paid by September 2, 2009 to C.
E. In relation to the right to supply a housing site in Young-si, the Defendant, who did not take any measure against the recovery of the investment amount, recovered KRW 25 million by negotiating with the new purchaser of the above right on December 2012.
It is the amount of KRW 30 million after recovering KRW 5 million on the condition that the defendant pays KRW 5 million on the part of the defendant and paying KRW 5 million on the part of the defendant.
F. Meanwhile, the Defendant filed a claim against Suwon District Court 2012Gahap3800 (Seoul High Court 2013Na5970) for the payment of the settlement amount of the liquidation amount of the investment recovery amount in the fossil land, and was sentenced to a judgment ordering C to pay the settlement amount and the damages for delay thereof on December 11, 2013.
G. On November 2017, the Plaintiff began to demand the Defendant to clarify the content and disposition of the Housing Site Supply Right Sales Contract at the time of tolerance.
[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap's evidence 1, 2, 4, Eul's evidence 2 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. The plaintiff is an investment recommendation made by the defendant and C in total 8.08 to C around 2008.