beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except where the plaintiffs are emphasized or added to the allegations that the court emphasizes or added, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The third side of the judgment of the court of first instance, the third side of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the third side of the judgment, are as follows.
According to the above facts, the defendant bears the obligation to pay the plaintiffs the balance of KRW 50 million out of the agreed amount of KRW 100 million under the agreement in this case. Under Article 408 of the Civil Act, the defendant bears the above obligation at an equal rate to the plaintiffs. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff A the above obligation at an annual rate of KRW 25 million, KRW 25 million, and KRW 25 million to the plaintiff B, and each of these are due after December 20, 2016 as of the date of approval for the use of the building in this case, which is the due date stipulated in the agreement in this case, as requested by the plaintiffs after January 1, 2017 to August 16, 2018, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint in this case, and at the rate of KRW 50 million under Article 3 (1) of the Civil Act from the next day to the day of full payment, the defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated by Presidential Decree No. 1657, May 21, 20197).
According to the facts as seen earlier and the result of appraisal by appraiser I of the first instance trial on whether the pertinent land constitutes unfair practices, etc., the market price of 66 square meters among the instant land is KRW 14,586,00,000, annual rent is KRW 291,720, and the land use fee that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiffs pursuant to the instant agreement is recognized as the fact that there was 10 million.
(2) However, the above facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 8, Eul evidence Nos. 4, 7, and 9, and the whole purport of the pleadings, can be acknowledged as a whole.