All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2022Da203804 Decided June 16, 2022 【Claim for Restitution of Purchase Price】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Where an incidental obligation is not performed, whether the contract may be rescinded in accordance with 544 of the Civil Act (negative) and standard for distinguishing a main obligation from an incidental obligation [2] In a case where Stock Company A concluded a sales contract for a resort condominium with Party B and included special arrangements concerning the undergrounding of nearby high-voltage lines therein, but as Stock Company A did not perform said special arrangements included in the contract, Party B demanded the rescission of the contract against Stock Company A on the grounds that the principal obligation of the contract was not fulfilled, the case holding that, even though readily concluding that Stock Company A’s obligation for the undergrounding of high-voltage lines in light of overall circumstances is not its principal obligation is difficult, the lower court failed to recognize the rescission of the contract and, in so determining, erred and adversely affected the conclusion of judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations | |
