손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On April 5, 2018, the Plaintiff purchased D’s wing 4.5 tons of truck from the Defendant for KRW 35 million (hereinafter “instant vehicle”). Of the purchase price, KRW 24,000,000, out of the purchase price, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 11,000,000 to the bank account in the name of the Defendant’s director, and remitted KRW 11,00,000 to the bank account in the name of the Defendant.
B. On April 13, 2018, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of F, a Easter of the Plaintiff as to the instant vehicle.
C. On May 1, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a vehicle entry contract with G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) with respect to the instant vehicle by setting the contract period as of April 30, 2019.
Although the Plaintiff was engaged in cargo transport business for two months after leaving the instant vehicle in the non-party company, the Plaintiff did not enter into a cargo insurance contract in accordance with the said vehicle entry contract, and the non-party company terminated the said vehicle entry contract with the Plaintiff.
E. On December 19, 2018, the Plaintiff sold the instant vehicle to H in KRW 16,000,000.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Gap evidence 11, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. Upon purchasing the instant vehicle, the Defendant believed that he would be allowed to carry on the transportation business by entering the non-party company, and purchased the instant vehicle. The Defendant violated the duty under the sales contract by selling the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff for private use, which cannot be operated by leaving the vehicle.
B. The defendant knew that the vehicle in this case is a vehicle to which the cargo loading insurance is not applicable with a private cargo vehicle, and concealed such fact and sold the vehicle in this case to the non-party company as if it was operated by the non-party company, which constitutes a tort.
C. The Plaintiff purchased the instant vehicle in KRW 35,00,000, including the Defendant’s horse and goodwill, but went through.