logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.06 2018가합507221
수분양자 명의변경절차 이행청구의소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff purchased the right to sell the reconstruction apartment and paid the intermediate payment. The defendant rejected the plaintiff's request to execute the sales contract on the ground that the ownership transfer registration of the reconstruction apartment was completed and the sales contract still remains valid, but the contract was rescinded due to the plaintiff's cause attributable to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant must implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer for the reason of the sale of the apartment, at the same time,

2. Determination

A. (1) On October 24, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract for the right to sell a Dara reconstruction apartment with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the content that (i) the purchase price of the 1.54 billion won for the Dara reconstruction apartment (1.54 million won for the contract amount, intermediate payment of KRW 154 million for the part payment, KRW 10 million for the part payment (payment date), and the remainder of KRW 1.376 million for the remainder (payment date November 15, 2017), and the special agreement that the remainder date may be adjusted under mutual agreement (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) (hereinafter “the initial sales contract”), (i) the Plaintiff entered the Plaintiff as the purchaser’s agent, and (ii) the Plaintiff paid the down payment and intermediate payment to the Defendant pursuant to the instant sales contract, and (iii) the Plaintiff’s ownership registration of the 31.5 billion won for the reconstruction of the apartment (hereinafter “the rebuilding project association”).

B. However, according to the statements in Section B’s Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5 through 9, and 12 through 18 (including each number), the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to postpone the payment of the remainder by the end of November 14, 2017, which is the day immediately preceding the date of the payment of the remainder.

arrow