beta
(영문) 대구지방법원포항지원 2015.11.10 2015가단456

차량인도 등

Text

1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiff the motor vehicle indicated in the separate sheet, and from October 1, 2015, the said motor vehicle.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the motor vehicle indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”), and the Defendant A operates the motor vehicle maintenance business under the trade name “C”, and the Defendant B was employed by the Defendant A and was in charge of repairing the instant motor vehicle.

B. On July 1, 2012, the Plaintiff requested the Defendants to repair the instant vehicle (hereinafter “instant repair contract”).

C. The Defendants did not repair the instant vehicle after receiving a request for repair thereof within a reasonable period of time. Defendant B, at the Plaintiff’s port, delivered the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff on May 16, 2014 by completing the repair thereof by July 16, 2014, and agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 30 million as compensation for damages in the course of fishing.

The Defendants did not repair the instant vehicle by the closing date of the pleadings of the instant case.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the plaintiff notified the defendants of the performance of the repair contract of this case within a reasonable period of time, and the plaintiff who did not perform the contract expressed his intent to cancel the contract as the complaint of this case, so the plaintiff delivered the complaint of this case to the defendants, and the repair contract of this case was lawfully rescinded.

Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to deliver the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff due to the cancellation of the contract and compensate the Plaintiff for damages due to the nonperformance of the contract.

B. As to the scope of compensation for damages and the scope of compensation for damages, each of the statements in the Health Team, Gap Nos. 5, 6, and 7 (including the number of branch numbers), the plaintiff paid the defendants' repair delay of the vehicle in this case by KRW 2 million a month from Magrenkk Co., Ltd. for one year from August 5, 2014, and the vehicle in this case.