(영문) 수원지방법원여주지원 2019.07.24 2018가합6531

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) 수원지방법원여주지원 2019.07.24 2018가합6531

매매대금

Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 210,00,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from October 13, 2018 to July 24, 2019; and (b) the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 2, 2016, the Plaintiff drafted a real estate sales contract stating that (i) the Plaintiff sells to the Defendant KRW 453,000,000 shares of KRW 1664/2360,000 (hereinafter “instant land”) of KRW 2360,00,000,000, the total amount of which is KRW 189,50,000,000,000; (ii) the remainder of the instant land on November 12, 2016 (=696/2360) shares of KRW 189,50,00,00.

("each of the above sales contracts" is referred to as "each of the above sales contracts". (b)

On November 7, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer as to ① 1664/2360 shares out of the instant land and ② 87/295 shares out of the instant land on November 29, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings [the defendant's second day of pleading of this case, which is marked on Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, are affixed with a forged seal and thus it cannot be admitted as evidence. However, the defendant's prior assertion is rejected on a different premise, since he/she lent his/her name in relation to the land of this case to non-party No. 4 (the legal brief dated March 8, 2019), and the defendant's seal affixed with Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3 is deemed to have affixed a seal affixed with the defendant's consent, and it cannot be deemed to have been forged. Thus, the defendant's prior assertion is rejected).

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff concluded each of the instant sales contracts with the Defendant and completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land, but failed to receive KRW 210,000,000 out of the sales price.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the unpaid remaining amount of KRW 210,000,000 and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant did not conclude a sales contract with the Plaintiff on the instant land.

3. Judgment on the cause of claim (the determination of purchaser of each sales contract of this case)

A. The actor who entered into the relevant legal doctrine is another person.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원경주지원 2016.04.22 2014가단164

-전주지방법원 2018.12.14 2017가단28193

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.01.12 2016가단85404

-울산지방법원 2016.11.23 2016가합680

-대구지방법원 2018.11.30 2018노3486