(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.07.24 2014가단52756

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.07.24 2014가단52756

청구이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of the dispute

A. On April 17, 2009, the Defendant merged a lot machine with a lot corporation (hereinafter “shotum”) with a lot lot corporation (hereinafter “shotum”).

Sller machine sales business appears to be the business of slurry Co., Ltd. before mergers, and the relevant parties of this case, including the plaintiff and the defendant, are referred to as slurry in a place that should be referred to as slurium.

It is a general sales agency that is supplied with slot machines and sells them.

B. On January 10, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the effect that the Plaintiff purchases 4,400,000 won of the slurgic machine ( Model lsM-R280) and shall pay the sales amount in 413,930 won per 12 months’ monthly installments (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

Around that time, the Defendant installed the same machinery at the Plaintiff’s workplace (hereinafter “the instant slot machine”).

The instant slot machine installed by the Defendant is the product supplied by the Defendant from shotum on April 13, 2013, and the model name, manufacturing number, and manufacturing date are as follows.

The "LVM-280" of lsM-280 No. 7 of the lsM-280 No. s. lvM-280 appears to be a clerical error in the lsM-280.

1st LSS082101400/0024 December 2012

C. The Defendant was prepared with a notarial deed as stated in the purport of the claim against the above installment payment claim (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”). D.

The Defendant applied for a compulsory execution against the notarial movables owned by the Plaintiff as the Daegu District Court No. 2014No. 4494 with the title of execution, and completed the seizure execution on November 13, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3, 6 evidence, Eul 1, 2, and 4 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant slot machine installed by the Defendant is not the lsM-R280 model under the instant sales contract, but the lsM-280 model of used goods.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.01.22 2015나12084

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2019.01.17 2018고단2399

-부산지방법원 2017.08.17 2015가단239894

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2015.09.16 2015고단465

-창원지방법원 2016.05.17 2015가단14146