logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.10.14 2015나5450
약정금
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. On August 31, 201, the Plaintiff paid KRW 65.9 million to the Defendant as cashier’s checks.

B. On November 19, 201, the Defendant purchased the instant apartment house at KRW 300 million (However, 180,000,000 won was decided to succeed to the obligation to refund deposit) of the amount of KRW 180,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.

C. The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 8 million on November 14, 2012, KRW 28.8 million on November 28, 2012, KRW 28.8 million on December 13, 2012, and KRW 28.8 million on December 13, 2012.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 4 (including branch numbers, if there is a ground for recognition) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On August 31, 2011, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff purchased a row house with a lower price than the market price by investing one’s own funds between the Defendant, and agreed to resell it, and paid KRW 65,90,000 to the Defendant for purchase of the apartment house.

However, the Defendant reselled the instant tenement house and returned only KRW 28.8 million to the Plaintiff after having resatising the instant tenement house.

Therefore, the Defendant sought payment of KRW 4,210,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 for the purchase of the instant tenement house, which was paid by the Plaintiff from the Plaintiff, plus KRW 6,89,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 for the purchase of the instant apartment house, which was paid by the Plaintiff, was 4,010,000,000,000.

There is an obligation to pay damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion did not agree between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff to resell the instant tenement house and to reflect the gains therefrom, and paid KRW 65.9 million paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff during the process of maintaining the living together with the Defendant.

3. In full view of all the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are deemed to have raised.

arrow