약정금반환
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
The Plaintiff asserts that, as a branch owner who entered into a contract with a limited company on the D Truck (hereinafter “instant truck”), the Plaintiff lent the instant truck to the Defendant for operating from August 15, 2012 to April 30, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendant all expenses incurred from the said truck operation during the said period. As such, the Defendant should pay the Plaintiff the sum of the oil tax and value-added tax generated during the said period as well as the damages for delay.
However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that there was an agreement between the original and the Defendant as alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
(O) When comprehensively considering the purport of the entire argument in the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the defendant purchased the truck of this case from the plaintiff, and the defendant paid the remaining installments of the truck of this case, which the plaintiff bears to the NAF Capital Co., Ltd., and the balance of the land entry fees and insurance premium unpaid, which the plaintiff bears to the mining logistics of the limited company, and settled the debt relationship between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and completed the registration of the transfer of vehicle name on May 1, 2013). Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for the payment based on this premise is without merit.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.