logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.12 2018가합512568 (1)
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit pertaining to the additional judgment shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On September 19, 2018, this court rendered an additional judgment ex officio pursuant to Article 212(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, since it omitted the judgment on the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C while rendering a judgment on the grounds of the additional judgment.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) Defendant B entered into a sales contract with the Plaintiff on December 5, 2017, as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by Defendant B (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(2) The Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 100,000 on December 5, 2017, the intermediate payment of KRW 100,000,000 on December 27, 2017; the intermediate payment of KRW 240,000,000 on December 27, 2017; the remainder of KRW 600,000 on January 17, 2018; and the remainder of KRW 600,00,000 on January 6, 200 by succeeding to the obligation to refund the deposit to the lessee (hereinafter “the instant transaction”).

2) The Plaintiff paid the down payment and intermediate payment to Defendant B pursuant to the instant sales contract.

B. Defendant C, the spouse of Defendant C, filed a claim against Defendant B for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of termination of title trust with respect to the instant real estate (U.S. District Court Decision 2016Gadan228122), and on May 17, 2017, a favorable judgment was rendered, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 2, 2017 (hereinafter “related judgment”).

(2) Meanwhile, on December 7, 2017, Defendant B returned KRW 60,000,000 out of the lease deposit to the lessee of the instant real estate.

3) On January 11, 2018, Defendant C presented the pertinent judgment to the Plaintiff, and Defendant C, the owner of the instant real estate, agreed to succeed to KRW 240,000,000, and KRW 60,000,000 already returned to the lessee out of the lease deposit obligations agreed to be succeeded by the Plaintiff, as the owner of the instant real estate.

(4) On January 12, 2018, the Plaintiff and Defendant C demanded payment. On January 12, 2018, at the real estate agent’s office of the Defendants, Defendant B and Defendant C attended the office of notary public and authenticated a written confirmation, and thereafter the Plaintiff.

arrow