전화가입권명의변경절차이행
1. The Defendant terminated the title trust of the Plaintiff on June 30, 2008 regarding the right to call call stated in the attached telephone sign.
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 to 9, the plaintiff expressed his intention to terminate a partnership agreement with C on June 30, 2008 while running the advertisement business in the name of "D" with the defendant's husband C, and then is running the mixed advertising business. The plaintiff and C may recognize the fact that the telephone in the separate sheet No. 1 used while running the advertisement business (hereinafter "the instant telephone") are subscribed to the defendant's name, and the fact that the plaintiff continues to use the instant telephone even after the plaintiff expressed his/her intention to terminate the partnership agreement, and the fact that he/she is paying the fee is not a dispute between the parties.
According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff and C shall be deemed to have held title trust to the defendant while running the advertisement business in partnership.
Meanwhile, in light of the fact that the Plaintiff terminated the partnership agreement with C on June 30, 2008 and runs the mixed advertising business, it shall be deemed that the Plaintiff transferred the right to the advertising business of C.
In full view of the above circumstances, the Plaintiff’s expression of intent to terminate a partnership agreement on June 30, 2008 and the Plaintiff’s right to the advertising business was transferred to the Plaintiff and the title trust agreement with the Defendant was terminated.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure to change the name of the instant telephone subscription right on the ground of termination of title trust on June 30, 2008 to the Plaintiff.
2. The conclusion is that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.