(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.26 2015나11747

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.26 2015나11747

계약금 반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are dismissed, respectively.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

Reasons

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the instant sales contract is conditional contract with the condition of rescission of the construction permission. Since the non-party company failed to meet the requirements for approval of the housing construction project plan for the instant project, and the application was withdrawn and a part of the project site was sold by auction, it is reasonable to view that the building permission for the instant land was impossible by social norms as long as the construction site was sold by auction. Accordingly, the instant sales contract was invalidated by the fulfillment

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to return the down payment of KRW 64,080,000 to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. 1) The Defendant’s assertion regarding the defense of the transfer of the buyer’s status was that the Plaintiff transferred the status of the purchaser under the instant sales contract to the non-party company after the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and the Plaintiff’s right under the instant sales contract has already been extinguished. 2) The acquisition of the contract for the purpose of succeeding the status of the contracting party and the transferee is a contract for the purpose of comprehensively transferring the status of the parties to the contract to a third party and withdrawing from the contractual relationship and succeeding the status of the third party by agreement on the third side of the contracting party and the contract for the purpose of succeeding the status of the third party. In common, it is possible for the other party to agree by two parties, and the other party’s consent or consent is not necessarily required to give consent to the agreement,

In the event of dispute as to whether to accept such a contract,

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2021.02.18 2020나313132

-대법원 2015.04.09 2012다101008

-대법원 2015.4.9.선고 2012다101008 판결

-대법원 2023. 3. 30. 선고 2022다296165 판결

-서울남부지방법원 2016.08.19 2016가단2806