beta
(영문) 부산지방법원서부지원 2019.12.11 2018가단13040

소유권이전등록

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are all corporations whose purpose is trucking transport business.

B. On December 27, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for acquisition of the general trucking transport business license of KRW 230 million with respect to the ten trucking trucks (However, if the borrower does not have the consent form, the Plaintiff will take over KRW 25 million) and a general trucking transport business (part of the agreement form).

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 225 million to the Defendant on the condition that the borrower of the cargo vehicle subject to transfer under the instant contract received a written consent, and the Defendant issued all necessary documents to the Plaintiff regarding the transfer of the cargo truck’s general freight truck business license.

The Plaintiff was transferred a general trucking transport business license to eight cargo vehicles except for each vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant truck”).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the Plaintiff paid all the transfer proceeds under the instant contract, the Plaintiff failed to obtain the general trucking business license for the instant trucking transport business, the Defendant is obligated to perform the Plaintiff’s obligation to file a report on transfer or acquisition of the trucking transport business using the instant trucking vehicle.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff paid KRW 225 million for the transfer price under the instant contract on condition that the borrower of the cargo vehicle directly transferred consent, and the Defendant received the said money and delivered all necessary documents for transferring the general trucking transport business of the cargo vehicle, but due to the Plaintiff’s circumstances, used the said cargo vehicle without obtaining the consent of the borrower of the instant cargo vehicle.