(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.01.31 2016가단40631

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) 서울남부지방법원 2018.01.31 2016가단40631

편취금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. To arrange the arguments and issues of the parties;

A. The Plaintiff, as the cause of the instant claim, seeks payment of KRW 43,330,00 against the Defendant by deceit, alleging the following grounds.

① On November 25, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired the right to benefit from the operation of the K5 vehicle K-5 vehicle (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant vehicle”) owned by the Defendant in total at KRW 56,50,000 (hereinafter referred to as “instant transfer contract”) and paid the Defendant the sum of KRW 43,30,000 (hereinafter referred to as “instant money”) of the down payment and the intermediate payment to the Defendant by November 30, 2015.

After that, according to the agreement between the parties, the transfer contract of this case was reduced to seven operating beneficial rights among the vehicles of this case as the total price of KRW 50 million.

② However, the Defendant did not perform its duty to deliver the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff, and did not return the instant money to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant, without intention or ability to transfer the operating right, concluded the transfer contract of this case by deceiving the plaintiff without any intention or ability, and acquired the money of this case from the plaintiff, and the plaintiff revoked the transfer contract of this case on the ground of such deception.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that the transferee under the transfer contract of this case is not the plaintiff but D, and that he did not have a duty to deliver the real object of this case to the transferee, and that he fulfilled all the obligations under the transfer contract of this case

C. Therefore, the issues of the instant case are first arranged as follows: “The transferee under the instant transfer contract is the Plaintiff and D,” and “the Defendant breached his duty under the instant transfer contract.”

2. Summary of the parties and relevant persons' specific arguments and statements

A. The Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant introduced F (G and C’s actual operator) through E (F) around August 2015 and operated the instant vehicle (at that time, the Defendant operated).

유사 판례

-인천지방법원부천지원 2015.09.16 2014가단45739

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.13 2019나61733

-대구지방법원 포항지원 2018.09.11 2017가단104567

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.21 2018나50507

-의정부지방법원 2017.11.15 2017나207582