2014Na2038911 Compensation for damages

2014Na2038928 (Joint), damages, etc.

1. B

2. C.

3. D;

4. E.

1. F;

2. Treatment and construction of stock companies;

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Da514750, 2014Gahap5029 (Joint) Decided October 2, 2014

May 29, 2015

July 17, 2015

1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. Purport of claim

A. The primary purport of the claim

피고들은 연대하여 원고 B, C에게 469,700,000원 및 그중 47,700,000원에 대하여는 2011. 2. 15.부터, 16,350,000원에 대하여는 2011. 3. 31.부터, 42,700,000원에 대하여는 2011. 4. 15.부터, 128,100,000원에 대하여는 2011. 8. 16.부터, 42,700,000원에 대하여는 2011. 12. 15.부터, 42,700,000원에 대하여는 2012. 4. 16.부터, 149,450,000원에 대하여는 2012. 12. 31.부터 이 사건 소장부본 송달일까지 연 5%, 그 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 20%의 각 비율로 계산한 돈을 지급하고, 원고 D에게 469,700,000원 및 그중 44,700,000원에 대하여는 2011. 7. 18.부터, 19,350,000원에 대하여는 2011. 7. 27.부터, 42,700,000원에 대하여는 2011. 8. 16.부터, 42,700,000원에 대하여는 2011. 12, 15.부터, 42,700,000원에 대하여는 2012. 4. 16.부터, 277,550,000원에 대하여는 2013. 2. 18.부터 이 사건 소장부본 송달일까지 연 5%, 그 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 20%의 각 비율로 계산한 돈을 지급하고, 원고 E에게 468,600,000원 및 그중 47,600,000원에 대하여는 2010. 10. 4.부터, 16,300,000원에 대하여는 2010. 10. 18.부터, 85,200,000원에 대하여는 2010. 12. 15.부터, 42,600,000원에 대하여는 2011. 4. 15.부터, 42,600,000원에 대하여는 2011. 8. 16.부터, 42,600,000원에 대하여는 2011. 12. 15.부터, 42,600,000원에 대하여는 2012. 4. 16.부터, 149,100,000원에 대하여는 2012. 12. 31.부터 이 사건 소장부본 송달일까지는 연 5%, 그 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지는 연 20%의 각 비율로 계산한 돈을 지급하라.

The Defendants jointly and severally pay to Plaintiff B and C 19,465,017 won, Plaintiff D 15,794,537 won, Plaintiff E 23,283,675 won, and each of the above amounts, with 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of the application for modification of the purport of the instant claim and modification of the cause of the claim to the day of full payment.

Defendant Treatment Construction Co., Ltd. shall pay to Plaintiff B and C 10,100,000 won with interest rate of 5% per annum from February 15, 2011 to the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case from December 31, 2012 to the date of complete payment, and 20% per annum from the following day to the date of complete payment. For Plaintiff D 10,100,000 won, interest rate of 10,000 won and 1,00,000 won per annum from July 18, 2011 to 9,10,000,000 won per annum from the following day to the date of complete payment, 5% per annum from the following day to the date of complete payment, 20% per annum from the date of complete payment, 10,000 won to the date of complete payment, 10,000 won per annum from the date of complete payment, 208,201.

B. Preliminary purport of claim

The Defendants shall pay to each of the Plaintiffs B and C 150,000 won with 5% interest per annum from December 31, 2012 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment. The Defendants shall pay to Plaintiff D 150,000 won with 5% interest per annum from February 18, 2013 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment. The Defendants shall pay to Plaintiff E 150,000,000 won with 5% interest per annum from December 31, 2012 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The same judgment as the above purport of each claim shall be sought.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reason why this Court is used in relation to this case is that the part concerning joint plaintiffs A of the first instance court is deleted, and the part concerning the relevant part is identical to the part concerning the reason for the judgment of the first instance except for the dismissal or addition of the corresponding part as follows. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4

A. Next, “The 6th sentence of the first instance judgment was 13th sentence” added to “The 6th sentence of the first instance court published the decision to revoke the designation of the said urban renewal acceleration district as of July 7, 2014, No. 2014-143.”

B. Each entry of Gap Nos. 3, 7, 8, and Eul Nos. 9 and 10 (including additional numbers) are as follows: "Nos. 3, 7, 8, 68, and Eul Nos. 9 and 10 (including additional numbers)," of the first instance court Nos. 4 and 5 of the first instance court's decision; "The results of inquiries into the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the first instance court; and the results of inquiries into the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the first instance court."

(c)in the seventh and fourteenth sentence of the first instance court, the phrase "property damage" shall be added to the phrase "(in the case of a plaintiff D, including the overdue charge of 5,310,470 won)".

D. From October 31, 2009, the urban environment rearrangement project cooperative in AM area, which was established for urban environment rearrangement project in the AM region in the AM region in the BM region in Bupyeong-si, Seocheon-si, the first instance court's decision No. 9 to 16 to 18, was selected as the contractor."

(e) The facts that there is no dispute between conduct 2 and third parties of the first instance judgment (based on recognition), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, 12, 15, each entry of evidence Nos. 25 through 27, inquiry results on the viewing of the court of the first instance, and the purport of the whole pleadings shall be added.

(f) The phrase “only the description of evidence Nos. 32-1, 2, 3, and 4 of the first instance judgment” in the first instance judgment of the court of the first instance shall read “only the description of evidence Nos. 32-1 through 4 of the evidence No. 32, and evidence No. 62-64 of the first instance judgment”.

(g)in addition to the following parts between the 17th sentence and the 11th sentence:

"The main contents of the above advertisements and the main motive or condition for which the plaintiffs entered into each of the instant apartment contracts" are "the profits that can enjoy by developing the relevant apartment complex into a new town in the area where the apartment complex of this case is located". Such profits are abstract and it is difficult to serve as a specific trade element. The realization of the new town development plan is determined by local governments, project implementers, etc. and the defendants' efforts cannot be made alone, and it is not possible to demand the performance against the defendants, and large-scale apartment complex construction and the opening of the revolving of the revolving of the revolving of the instant apartment complex is not related to the external type and quality of the apartment complex of this case, but rather to form the surrounding environment of the apartment complex of this case, and is merely a factor that can expect convenient living conditions for the residents of this case and increase their future values, such contents cannot be viewed as the contents of each of the instant sales contract of this case and are merely an inducement for subscription."

2. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants of this case are dismissed as they are without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, and the plaintiffs' appeal against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-soo

Judges Han Young-young

Judges Shin Jae-ok

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.