logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2015.02.05 2013가단8846
약정금
Text

1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 22,532,05 and the interest rate thereon from August 27, 2013 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Around September 2010, the Plaintiff drafted a sales contract with the purport that the Defendants sell D, E, F, G, H, etc. in the amount of KRW 176,190,000 to the Defendants (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

B. According to the special agreement in the above sales contract, the transfer income tax was stipulated to be paid by Defendant B and the Plaintiff, who is the buyer.

In addition, Defendant B prepared to the Plaintiff a letter (Evidence A 3, hereinafter referred to as each of the instant letters) that the Plaintiff would deposit capital gains tax on the Gyeongnam-gun D, E, F, G, and H (hereinafter referred to as the “instant real estate”).

C. On September 20, 2010, the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate was completed in the Plaintiff’s name with 1/2 shares, respectively, to the Defendants.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 22,532,05 to the competent authority as capital gains tax following the transfer of the instant real estate from November 30, 2010 to July 29, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence A1 to 8, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, Defendant B had to bear capital gains tax imposed on the Plaintiff according to the transfer of the instant real estate through the instant sales contract and each letter.

In addition, considering the above evidence and the fact that Defendant B appears to have agreed to pay capital gains tax as the purchaser of the instant real estate, it is recognized that Defendant C, a joint purchaser of the instant real estate, has agreed to pay capital gains tax on implied terms.

B. The summary of the claim 1 as to the Defendants’ assertion was based on the name of the Plaintiff, but in fact, I was a real estate owned by the Plaintiff, and thus I was to bear the transfer income tax following the transfer of the instant real estate. The Plaintiff was I to raise funds for raising the funds.

arrow